Detecting Teeth Defects on Automotive Gears Using Deep Learning
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
Gears are a vital component in many complex mechanical systems. In automotive systems, and in particular vehicle transmissions, we rely on them to function properly on different types of challenging environments and conditions. However, when a gear is manufactured with a defect, the gear's integrity can become compromised and lead to catastrophic failure. The current inspection process used by an automotive gear manufacturer in Guelph, Ontario, requires human operators to visually inspect all gear produced. Yet, due to the quantity of gears manufactured, the diverse array of defects that can arise, the time requirements for inspection, and the reliance on the operator's inspection ability, the system suffers from poor scalability, and defects can be missed during inspection. In this work, we propose a machine vision system for automating the inspection process for gears with damaged teeth defects. The implemented inspection system uses a faster R-CNN network to identify the defects, and combines domain knowledge to reduce the manual inspection of non-defective gears by 66%.
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