MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312378154 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2022.3222287

Knowledge-Intensive Diagnostics Using Case-Based Reasoning and Synthetic Case Generation

2022· article· en· W4312378154 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Pichette, Claude Thibeault

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottleneckComputer sciencePrinted circuit boardVolume (thermodynamics)Production (economics)Knowledge baseRecommender systemReliability engineeringIndustrial engineeringData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to commercial pressures, North-American printed circuit-board assembly manufacturers have had to reposition themselves in the more difficult market segment of lower volume, higher complexity products, also called high-mix, low-volume (HMLV). The high per-unit costs of these products justify substantial diagnosis and repair efforts when defects are detected in production. Although automated diagnostics is desirable, the low production volumes impose severe limits on available data. We propose a novel approach based on knowledge modeling and case-based reasoning for automated diagnosis of assembled printed circuit boards in an HMLV production environment. Our hybrid approach can overcome the knowledge-acquisition bottleneck even in a data-poor environment. The proposed approach does not require contributions from product designers or experts and is designed to operate using only information available during manufacturing. Our test results show that our diagnostic system can detect, locate and classify all single faults and multiple faults affecting up to three neighboring nodes with a better success rate than the reference commercial tool. Moreover, case base data, including board layout information and user feedback from previous repairs, is used to feed a recommender system to provide repair suggestions. A production and repair data simulator is described and used to evaluate the recommender system’s effectiveness.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207