Object Detection Survey for Industrial Applications with Focus on Quality Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The industrial quality control plays a key role in ensuring flawless products and efficient production processes. In sectors such as automotive, electronics, and packaging, manufacturers face increasing pressure to detect defects early, minimize scrap, and meet strict regulatory and customer requirements. Traditional manual inspection methods such as visual checks and manual measurements are often slow, inconsistent, and prone to human error. In the past few years, computer vision-based methods, in particular object detection, have established themselves as powerful tools for automating and improving quality inspections. This article presents a survey regarding the present status of research on state-of-the-art object detection methods in an industrial context. It explains technical functionalities, discusses advantages and disadvantages with regard to requirements such as accuracy, speed and robustness and presents specific industrial applications, for example for defect detection and component measurement. The paper concludes with a comparative analysis of the methods, focussing on their suitability for various industrial scenarios. The objective is to provide recommendations for the efficient use of object detection in industrial quality control and to identify potential future research directions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".