Detection and Location of Sheet Metal Parts for Industrial Robots
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a multi-object recognition and location approach based on a 2D vision for Sheet Metal Parts. This novel proposed approach allows to identify several texture-less parts to be manipulated using a KUKA KR6 R900 sixx robot arm. The particularity of the suggested method is to build up a process able to recognize this kind of parts characterized with insufficient details to be trained with. The proposed solution overcomes detection problems related to parts appearance variability due to changes in color and contrast under different lighting situations. PatMax tool was used for workpieces recognition and to determine their location. PatMax and PatQuick algorithms were tested with a set of runtime images of 144 different samples. All the parts have been successfully recognized then sorted. The experimental results confirmed the performance of Pat Max and the minimum recorded score was 95%. Fit error scores with PatMax were close to 0 while coverage scores were close to 100%, indicating a good model-pattern fit. The clutter score was calculated based on the proportion of the extraneous features present in the found object compared to those of the trained pattern. This is an assessment of the degree of features absent at the execution level. Based on the obtained results, 85% of detections had a zero clutter score.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it