MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379536998 · doi:10.23977/jemm.2023.080206

Method and Device for Effectively Utilizing OpenCV to Detect PCB Board Size

2023· article· en· W4379536998 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guihua Huang, Tingting Zhang, Chang‐Xiang Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and Machinery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrinted circuit boardAutomated optical inspectionProcess (computing)AutomationMeasure (data warehouse)On boardComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionEngineering drawingEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the process of PCB board production, it is necessary to accurately measure the contour dimensions of the PCB board and the dimensions of various types of wires, holes, or slots on the PCB board to avoid a large number of defective products flowing into the subsequent production process. In existing technology, the measurement of the dimensions of wires, holes, or slots on the PCB board mostly relies on manual work, which has the problems of low measurement efficiency and high measurement error rate, Unable to meet the efficient and high-quality production needs of PCB boards. This article proposes a method and device for effectively utilizing OpenCv to detect PCB board size. This device is based on an optical image measurement system, combined with the template matching method in OpenCv, and can automatically complete forming inspection and size measurement by scanning multiple PCB boards by one time.This device can complete measurement evaluation, report generation, and SPC data analysis for multiple PCB boards, achieving high automation and significantly improving measurement accuracy system.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and MachinerySame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207