MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387653858 · doi:10.1002/aaai.12129

SolderNet: Towards trustworthy visual inspection of solder joints in electronics manufacturing using explainable artificial intelligence

2023· article· en· W4387653858 on OpenAlex

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

VenueAI Magazine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of WaterlooUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolderingPrinted circuit boardElectronicsVisual inspectionJoint (building)Transparency (behavior)Automated optical inspectionManufacturing engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceTrustworthinessEngineering drawingArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringComputer securityArchitectural engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In electronics manufacturing, solder joint defects are a common problem affecting a variety of printed circuit board components. To identify and correct solder joint defects, the solder joints on a circuit board are typically inspected manually by trained human inspectors, which is a very time‐consuming and error‐prone process. To improve both inspection efficiency and accuracy, in this work, we describe an explainable deep learning‐based visual quality inspection system tailored for visual inspection of solder joints in electronics manufacturing environments. At the core of this system is an explainable solder joint defect identification system called SolderNet that we design and implement with trust and transparency in mind. While several challenges remain before the full system can be developed and deployed, this study presents important progress towards trustworthy visual inspection of solder joints in electronics manufacturing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.251 · 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