Computer Vision for Recognition of Materials and Vessels in Chemistry Lab Settings and the Vector-LabPics Dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work presents a machine learning approach for computer vision-based recognition of materials inside vessels in a chemistry lab and other settings. In addition, we release a dataset associated with the training of the model for further model development. The task to learn is finding the region, boundaries, and category for each material phase and vessel in an image. Handling materials inside mostly transparent containers is the main activity performed by human and robotic chemists in the laboratory. Visual recognition of vessels and their content is essential for performing this task. Modern machine vision methods learn recognition tasks by using datasets containing a large number of annotated images. This work presents the Vector-LabPics dataset, which consists of 2187 images of materials within mostly transparent vessels in a chemistry lab and other general settings. The images are annotated for both the vessels and the individual material phases inside them, and each instance is assigned one or more classes (liquid, solid, foam, suspension, powder,...). The fill level, labels, corks, and parts of the vessel are also annotated. Several convolutional nets for semantic and instance segmentation were trained on this dataset. The trained neural networks achieved good accuracy in detecting and segmenting vessels and material phases, and in classifying liquids and solids, but relatively low accuracy in segmenting multiphase systems such as phase-separating liquids.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".