MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407574641 · doi:10.1109/tase.2025.3542076

Automatic Point Cloud Clustering for Surface Defect Diagnosis

2025· article· en· W4407574641 on OpenAlexaff
Xingjian Liu, Harikrishnan Madhusudanan, Yue Wang, Junhui Zhu, Yong Wang, Changhai Ru, Xinyu Liu, Yu Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesScience and Technology Program of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCluster analysisCloud computingPoint cloudComputer sciencePoint (geometry)Artificial intelligenceData miningMathematicsGeometryOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Point cloud clustering is a promising method for 3D surface defect diagnosis in manufacturing but requires manual clustering parameter selection, reducing usability. This paper proposes an automatic point cloud clustering method to address this issue. It employs a strategy that progresses from coarse to fine. In the coarse searching stage, a K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN) graph analysis technique is developed to recognize potential defective regions in parallel. Moving on to the fine stage of extracting detailed defects, a modified DBSCAN algorithm is proposed, in which the clustering parameters are calculated automatically from the KNN graph analysis results. Experimental results showed that the proposed method achieved cloud clustering with automatically calculated clustering parameters for surface defect diagnosis. The proposed method outperformed the traditional region growing algorithm in accuracy (0.942 vs. 0.680) and processing speed (21500 points/sec vs. 8740 points/sec) without requiring manual intervention.Note to Practitioners—This paper presents a method for diagnosing defects on automobile and flat steel surfaces. Current 3D point cloud techniques for surface defect diagnosis require manual parameter adjustments, reducing usability. This paper proposes an automatic method without manual intervention. The proposed method uses a coarse-to-fine strategy. The 3D point cloud is divided into sub-blocks to locate potential defects, and a clustering algorithm then extracts detailed defects with automatically determined parameters. We mathematically characterize changes in point density caused by surface defects and show how these features can be used for clustering parameter calculation. Experimental results demonstrate the method’s efficiency on flat as well as some curved surfaces, but it has yet to be evaluated on complex structures. Future work will aim to broaden its application to include a more extensive variety of surfaces and integrate it with robotic vision systems.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and EngineeringSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207