MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385767366 · doi:10.1007/s40747-023-01180-7

A deep learning model for steel surface defect detection

2023· article· en· W4385767366 on OpenAlexaff
Zhaoguo Li, Xiumei Wei, M. Hassaballah, Yihong Li, Xuesong Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueComplex & Intelligent Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottleneckFeature extractionComputer scienceNormalization (sociology)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Convolution (computer science)Artificial neural networkDeep learningEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Industrial defect detection is a hot topic in the field of computer vision. It is a challenging task due to complex features and many categories of industrial defects. In this paper, a deep learning model based on the multiscale feature extraction module is introduced for steel surface defect detection. The main focus on the feature extraction capability of the model and feature fusion capability to improve the accuracy of the model for steel surface defect detection. First, to improve the feature extraction ability of the model, a multiscale feature extraction (MSFE) module is introduced. The MSFE module can effectively extract multiscale features through three branches that have different convolution kernel sizes. Second, an efficient feature fusion (EFF) module is proposed to optimize feature fusion by adding features from the backbone network to the neck network. Third, this paper puts forward a new Bottleneck module by reducing the normalization layer and activation function in the original Bottleneck module. Finally, the backbone network is deepened to further enhance the feature extraction ability of the model. Extensive experiments are conducted on the public NEU-DET dataset. The experimental results validate the effectiveness of the designed modules and the proposed model. Compared with other state-of-the-art methods, the proposed model achieves optimal accuracy(73.08% mAP@0.5) while maintaining a small number of parameters.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations107
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComplex & Intelligent SystemsSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207