Performance Based Modifications of Random Forest to Perform Automated Defect Detection for Fluorescent Penetrant Inspection
Source abstract
Abstract
The established Machine Learning algorithm Random Forest (RF) has previously been shown to be effective at performing automated defect detection for test pieces which have been processed using fluorescent penetrant inspection (FPI). The work presented here investigates three methods (two previously proposed in other fields, one novel method) of modifying the FPI RF based on the individual performance of decision trees within the RF. Evaluating based on the $$F2$$ F 2 Score, which is the harmonic mean of precision and recall which places a larger weighting on recall, it is possible to reduce the RF in size by up to 50%, improving speed and memory requirements, whilst still gain equivalent results to a full RF. Introducing a performance based weighting or retraining decision trees which fall below a certain performance level however, offers no improvement on results for the increased computation time required to implement.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection · Image and Object Detection Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (28)
Show source-provided references
1. Brasche, L., Lopez, R., Larson, B.: A study of drying and cleaning methods used in preparation for fluorescent penetrant inspection. AIP Conf. Proc. 657, 1323–1330 (2003)10.1063/1.1570285 ↗
2. Technik, A.G.L., Engine Overhauls: The Search for Material Damage. https://www.lufthansa-technik.com/engine-overhauls
3. Shipway, N., Barden, T., Huthwaite, P., Lowe, M.: Automated defect detection for fluorescent penetrant inspection using random forest. NDT & E International, p. NDT & E International. Elsevier, New York (2018)
4. Wall, M.: Human factors guidance to improve reliability of non-destructive testing in the offshore oil and gas industry. In: 7th European-American Workshop on Reliability of NDE, 2017. https://www.esrtechnology.com/index.php/news/latest-news/44-news/archived-news-articles/239-hois-project-presented-at-prestigious-reliability-workshop
5. Bell, J.: Machine learning. Wiley (2014). https://doi.org/10.1002/978111918346410.1002/9781119183464 ↗
6. Mitchell, T.: Machine Learning, International Edition. McGraw-Hill series in Computer Science. McGraw-Hill, New York (1997)
7. Zhao, Z., Liu, H.: Spectral feature selection for supervised and unsupervised learning. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Machine Learning (2007)10.1145/1273496.1273641 ↗
8. De Ville, B.: Decision trees. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. 5(6), 448–455 (2013)10.1002/wics.1278 ↗
9. Speybroeck, N.: Classification and regression trees. Int. J. Public Health 57, 243–246 (2012)10.1007/s00038-011-0315-z ↗
10. Ledolter, J.: Decision trees (Chap. 13). Data Mining and Business Analytics with R. Wiley, New York (2013)10.1002/9781118596289 ↗
11. Webb, A.R., Copsey, K.D.: Ensemble methods. Statistical Pattern Recognition, pp. 361–403. Wiley, Chichester (2011)10.1002/9781119952954.ch8 ↗
12. Hassan, M.A., Khalil, A., Kaseb, S., Kassem, M.A.: Exploring the potential of tree-based ensemble methods in solar radiation modeling. Applied Energy, vol. 203. Elsevier, New York (2017)
13. Breiman, L.: Random forests. Machine Learning 45(1), 5–32 (2001)10.1023/A:1010933404324 ↗
14. Schroff, F., Criminisi, A., Zisserman, A.: Object class segmentation using random forests, In: Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference, BMVA Press, (2008), pp. 54.1–54.10, https://doi.org/10.5244/C.22.54.10.5244/C.22.54. ↗
15. Tripoliti, E.E., Fotiadis, D.I., Manis, G.: Modifications of the construction and voting mechanisms of the random forests algorithm. Data Knowl. Eng. 87, 41–65 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2013.07.00210.1016/j.datak.2013.07.002 ↗
16. Biau, G., Scornet, E.: A random forest guided tour. TEST 25(2), 197–227 (2016)10.1007/s11749-016-0481-7 ↗
17. Chan, J.C.W., Beckers, P., Spanhove, T., Borre, J.V.: An evaluation of ensemble classifiers for mapping Natura 2000 Heathland in Belgium using spaceborne angular hyperspectral (CHRIS/Proba) imagery. Int. J. Appl. Earth Observ. Geoinform. 18, 13–22 (2012)10.1016/j.jag.2012.01.002 ↗
18. Belgiu, M., Dragut, L.: Random forest in remote sensing: a review of applications and future directions. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote. Sens. 114, 24–31 (2016)10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.01.011 ↗
19. Schulter, S., Wohlhart, P., Leistner, C., Saffari, A., Roth, P. M., Bischof, H.: Alternating decision forests. In: 2013 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, (2013), pp. 508–515. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2013.7210.1109/CVPR.2013.72 ↗
20. Robnik-Å ikonja, M.: Improving random forests. In: Boulicaut, J., Esposito, F., Giannotti, F., Pedreschi, D. (eds.) Machine Learning: ECML. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3201, pp. 359–370. (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30115-8_3410.1007/978-3-540-30115-8_34 ↗
21. Chen, C., Breiman, L.: Using random forest to learn imbalanced data. University of California, Berkeley
22. Guenter, S., Bunke, H.: Optimization of weights in a multiple classifier handwritten word recognition system using a genetic algorithm. Electron. Lett. Comput. Vis. Image Anal. 3(1):25–44 (2004). https://elcvia.cvc.uab.es/article/view/v3-n1-guenter-bunke10.5565/rev/elcvia.67 ↗
23. Tsymbal, A., Pechenizkiy, M., Cunningham, P.: Dynamic integration with random forests. In: FÃŒrnkranz, J., Scheffer, T., Spiliopoulou, M. (eds.) Machine Learning: ECML. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4212. Springer, Berlin (2006)
24. Bernard, S., Heutte, L., Adam, S.: On the selection of decision trees in random forests. In: 2009 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (2009), pp. 302–307. https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2009.517869310.1109/IJCNN.2009.5178693 ↗
25. Rodriguez, J.J., Kuncheva, L.I., Alonso, C.J.: Rotation forest: a new classifier ensemble method. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 28(10), 1619–1630 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2006.21110.1109/TPAMI.2006.211 ↗
26. Cunningham, P.: A taxonomy of similarity mechanisms for case-based reasoning. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 21(11), 1532–1543 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2008.22710.1109/TKDE.2008.227 ↗
27. AMS K Non Destructive Methods and Processes Committee (2013) Inspection Material, Penetrant AMS2644F. SAE International. https://doi.org/10.4271/AMS2644F10.4271/AMS2644F ↗
28. Powers, D.: Evaluation: from precision, recall and f-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness & correlation. J Mach Learn Technol 2, 37–63 (2011)