MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200522721 · doi:10.5121/csit.2021.112314

One-Class Model for Fabric Defect Detection

2021· article· en· W4200522721 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Language Processing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)Leverage (statistics)AutoencoderPattern recognition (psychology)Filter bankComputer visionGabor filterFilter (signal processing)Feature extractionDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An automated and accurate fabric defect inspection system is in high demand as a replacement for slow, inconsistent, error-prone, and expensive human operators in the textile industry. Previous efforts focused on certain types of fabrics or defects, which is not an ideal solution. In this paper, we propose a novel one-class model that is capable of detecting various defects on different fabric types. Our model takes advantage of a well designed Gabor filter bank to analyze fabric texture. We then leverage an advanced deep learning algorithm, autoencoder, to learn general feature representations from the outputs of the Gabor filter bank. Lastly, we develop a nearest neighbor density estimator to locate potential defects and draw them on the fabric images. We demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed model by testing it on various types of fabrics such as plain, patterned, and rotated fabrics. Our model also achieves a true positive rate (a.k.a recall) value of 0.895 with no false alarms on our dataset based upon the Standard Fabric Defect Glossary.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it