MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286560905 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-16302-3

End-to-end deep learning framework for printed circuit board manufacturing defect classification

2022· article· en· W4286560905 on OpenAlexafffund
Abhiroop Bhattacharya, Sylvain G. Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsReworkBottleneckComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkDeep learningPrinted circuit boardBenchmark (surveying)Artificial intelligenceReliability (semiconductor)ThroughputObject detectionProduction linePattern recognition (psychology)Real-time computingReliability engineeringEmbedded systemEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a complete deep-learning framework using a single-step object detection model in order to quickly and accurately detect and classify the types of manufacturing defects present on Printed Circuit Board (PCBs). We describe the complete model architecture and compare with the current state-of-the-art using the same PCB defect dataset. These benchmark methods include the Faster Region Based Convolutional Neural Network (FRCNN) with ResNet50, RetinaNet, and You-Only-Look-Once (YOLO) for defect detection and identification. Results show that our method achieves a 98.1% mean average precision(mAP[IoU = 0.5]) on the test samples using low-resolution images. This is 3.2% better than the state-of-the-art using low-resolution images (YOLO V5m) and 1.4% better than the state-of-the-art using high-resolution images (FRCNN-ResNet FPN). While achieving better accuracies, our model also requires roughly 3× fewer model parameters (7.02M) compared with the state-of-the-art FRCNN-ResNet FPN (23.59M) and YOLO V5m (20.08M). In most cases, the major bottleneck of the PCB manufacturing chain is quality control, reliability testing and manual rework of defective PCBs. Based on the initial results, we firmly believe that implementing this model on a PCB manufacturing line could significantly increase the production yield and throughput, while dramatically reducing manufacturing costs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations115
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207