Automatic Segmentation by the Method of Interval Fusion with Preference Aggregation When Recognizing Weld Defects
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Quality control in welding is usually carried out during the visual inspection process and is highly dependent on an operator experience. In this paper, an approach to automatic detection and classification of a defective region is proposed, in which the segmentation of the analyzed photographic image of a weld (i.e., its division into defective and defect-free regions) is performed using the region growing procedure. The starting points for this procedure are selected by the authors’ robust method of interval fusion with preference aggregation (IF&PA) on the base of image histogram analysis. Testing the proposed approach for real life photographic images showed its ability to detect different types of weld defects with higher accuracy compared to traditional methods, such as the Otsu method and k-means.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection · Manufacturing Process and Optimization · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (22)
Show source-provided references
1. Nacereddine, N., Goumeidane, A.B., and Ziou, D., Unsupervised weld defect classification in radiographic images using multivariate generalized Gaussian mixture model with exact computation of mean and shape parameters, Comput. Ind., 2019, vol. 108, pp. 132–149.10.1016/j.compind.2019.02.010 ↗
2. Muravyov, S.V. and Pogadaeva, E.Yu., Computer-aided recognition of defects in welded joints during visual inspections based on geometric attributes, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test., vol. 56, no. 3, 2020, pp. 259–267.10.1134/S1061830920030055 ↗
3. Mery, D. and Pieringer, C., Computer Vision for X-Ray Testing: Imaging, Systems, Image Databases, and Algorithms, Cham (Switzerland): Springer Nature, 2021.10.1007/978-3-030-56769-9 ↗
4. Zhang, L., Zhang, Y., Dai, B., Chen, B., and Li, Y., Welding defect detection based on local image enhancement, IET Image Process., 2019, vol. 13, pp. 2647–2658.10.1049/iet-ipr.2018.5840 ↗
5. Yazid, H., Arof, H., and Yazid, H., Automated thresholding in radiographic image for welded joints, Nondestr. Test. Eval., 2012, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 69–80.10.1080/10589759.2011.591795 ↗
6. Zahran, O., Kasban, H., El-Kordy, M., and Abd El-Samie, F.E., Automatic weld defect identification from radiographic images, NDT & E Int., 2013, vol. 57, pp. 26–35.10.1016/j.ndteint.2012.11.005 ↗
7. GOST (State Standard) R ISO 6520-1-2012: Welding and related processes. Classification of defects in geometry and continuity in metallic materials. Part 1. Fusion welding.
8. Mancas, M., Gosselin, B., and Macq, B., Segmentation using a region-growing thresholding, in Proc. SPIE. Image Processing: Algorithms and Systems IV, 2005, vol. 5672, pp. 388–398.10.1117/12.587995 ↗
9. Sheela, C.J.J. and Suganthi, G., Morphological edge detection and brain tumor segmentation in Magnetic Resonance (MR) images based on region growing and performance evaluation of modified Fuzzy C-Means (FCM) algorithm, Multimed. Tools Appl., 2020, vol. 79, pp. 17483–17496.10.1007/s11042-020-08636-9 ↗
10. Muravyov, S.V., Khudonogova, L.I., and Emelyanova, E.Y., Interval data fusion with preference aggregation, Measurement, 2018, vol. 116, pp. 621–630.10.1016/j.measurement.2017.08.045 ↗
11. Muravyov, S.V., Khudonogova, L.I., and Ho, M.D., Analysis of heteroscedastic measurement data by the self-refining method of interval fusion with preference aggregation—IF&PA, Measurement, 2021, vol. 183, p. 109851.10.1016/j.measurement.2021.109851 ↗
12. Muravyov, S.V., Ordinal measurement, preference aggregation and interlaboratory comparisons, Measurement, 2013, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 2927–2935.10.1016/j.measurement.2013.04.044 ↗
13. Muravyov, S.V. and Emelyanova, E.Y., Kemeny rule for preference aggregation: reducing all exact solutions to a single one, Measurement, 2021, vol. 182, p. 109403.10.1016/j.measurement.2021.109403 ↗
14. Gonzalez, R.C. and Woods, R.E., Digital Image Processing, New York: Pearson, 2018.
15. Muravyov, S.V. and Pogadaeva, E.Yu., Recognition ability of interval fusion with preference aggregation in weld defects images analysis, in Proc. 17th IMEKO TC10 Conf. “Global Trends Test. Diagn. & Inspection 2030” (Dubrovnik, 2020), pp. 271–276.
16. Muravyov, S.V. and Marinushkina, I.A., Towards a justification of choosing the number of participants for interlaboratory comparisons, Comput. Telecommun. Cont., 2015, no. 4, pp. 81–90.10.5862/JCSTCS.224.8 ↗
17. Otsu, N., A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 1979, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 62–66.10.1109/TSMC.1979.4310076 ↗
18. Zhan, Y. and Zhang, G., An improved Otsu algorithm using histogram accumulation moment for ore segmentation, Symmetry, 2019, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 431.10.3390/sym11030431 ↗
19. Dhanachandra, N., Manglem, K., and Chanu, Y.J., Image segmentation using K-means clustering algorithm and subtractive clustering algorithm, Procedia Comput. Sci., 2015, vol. 54, pp. 764–771.10.1016/j.procs.2015.06.090 ↗
20. Levandowsky, M. and Winter, D., Distance between sets, Nature, 1971, vol. 234, pp. 34–35.10.1038/234034a0 ↗
21. Zhou, D., Fang, J., Song, X., Guan, C., Yin, J., Dai, Y., and Yang, R., IoU loss for 2D/3D object detection, in Proc. 7th Int. Conf. 3D Vis. (Québec City, 2019), vol. 1, pp. 85–94.10.1109/3DV.2019.00019 ↗
22. Dedkova, A.A. and Florinsky, I.V., Geomorphometry and microelectronic metrology: Converged realms, Trans. GIS, 2023, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1642–1661.10.1111/tgis.13092 ↗