XEdgeAI: A human-centered industrial inspection framework with data-centric Explainable Edge AI approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advancements in deep learning have significantly improved visual quality inspection and predictive maintenance within industrial settings. However, deploying these technologies on low-resource edge devices poses substantial challenges due to their high computational demands and the inherent complexity of Explainable AI (XAI) methods. This paper addresses these challenges by introducing a novel XAI-integrated Visual Quality Inspection framework that optimizes the deployment of semantic segmentation models on low-resource edge devices. Our framework incorporates XAI and the Large Vision Language Model to deliver human-centered interpretability through visual and textual explanations to end-users. This is crucial for end-user trust and model interpretability. We outline a comprehensive methodology consisting of six fundamental modules: base model fine-tuning, XAI-based explanation generation, evaluation of XAI approaches, XAI-guided data augmentation , development of an edge-compatible model, and the generation of understandable visual and textual explanations. Through XAI-guided data augmentation, the enhanced model incorporating domain expert knowledge with visual and textual explanations is successfully deployed on mobile devices to support end-users in real-world scenarios. Experimental results showcase the effectiveness of the proposed framework, with the mobile model achieving competitive accuracy while significantly reducing model size. This approach paves the way for the broader adoption of reliable and interpretable AI tools in critical industrial applications, where decisions must be both rapid and justifiable. Our code for this work can be found at https://github.com/Analytics-Everywhere-Lab/vqixai .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".