MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Boundary Enhanced Semantic Segmentation for High Resolution Electron Microscope Images

2022· article· en· W4312300771 on OpenAlex
Matthias Pollach, Felix Schiegg, Matthias Ludwig, Ann-Christin Bette, Alois Knoll

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

Venue2022 30th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsInfineon Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationLeverage (statistics)Artificial intelligenceEncoderImage segmentationComputer visionArtificial neural networkBoundary (topology)Domain (mathematical analysis)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work proposes an automated semantic segmen-tation approach for high resolution scanning electron microscope images, which enables the detection of hardware Trojans and counterfeit integrated circuits. We evaluate state of the art segmentation approaches and leverage expert domain knowledge to propose a neural network architecture tailored for our use case. We further address the challenge of the limited availability of training images and evaluate which pre-trained encoder can be leveraged most effectively for the given use case. The proposed segmentation network uses expert domain knowledge to account for the importance of separating technology features on a fine-grain level by introducing a separate boundary stream. The test results compare our network to a baseline approach and to two state-of-the-art segmentation networks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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