Explainable AI Methods for Identification of Glue Volume Deficiencies in Printed Circuit Boards
Source abstract
Abstract
In printed circuit board (PCB) assembly, the volume of dispensed glue is closely related to the PCB’s durability, production costs, and the overall product reliability. Currently, quality inspection is performed manually by operators, inheriting the limitations of human-performed procedures. To address this, we propose an automatic optical inspection framework that utilizes convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and post-hoc explainable methods. Our methodology handles glue quality inspection as a three-fold procedure. Initially, a detection system based on CenterNet MobileNetV2 is developed to localize PCBs, thus, offering a flexible lightweight tool for targeting and cropping regions of interest. Consequently, a CNN is proposed to classify PCB images into three classes based on the placed glue volume achieving 92.2% accuracy. This classification step ensures that varying glue volumes are accurately assessed, addressing potential quality issues that appear early in the production process. Finally, the Deep SHAP and Grad-CAM methods are applied to the CNN classifier to produce explanations of the decision making and further increase the interpretability of the proposed approach, targeting human-centered artificial intelligence. These post-hoc explainable methods provide visual explanations of the model’s decision-making process, offering insights into which features and regions contribute to each classification decision. The proposed method is validated with real industrial data, demonstrating its practical applicability and robustness. The evaluation procedure indicates that the proposed framework offers increased accuracy, low latency, and high-quality visual explanations, thereby strengthening quality assurance in PCB manufacturing.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Material Properties and Processing
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Energy Systems, Gaiopolis Campus, University of Thessaly, 41500 Larisa, Greece
Information Technologies Institute, Centre for Research & Technology, 57001 Thessaloniki, Greece
Microchip Technology Inc., Caldicot NP26 5YW, UK
Funding
EU Project OPTIMAI
References (65)
Show source-provided references
1. Gryna, F.M., and Juran, J.M. (1999). Quality and Costs, McGraw-Hill.
2. A Review and Analysis of Automatic Optical Inspection and Quality Monitoring Methods in Electronics Industry10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3029127 ↗
3. Evaluating the Eye Fatigue Problem in Wafer Inspection10.1109/TSM.2004.831943 ↗
4. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): What We Know and What Is Left to Attain Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence10.1016/j.inffus.2023.101805 ↗
5. Human-Centred Design in Industry 4.0: Case Study Review and Opportunities for Future Research10.1007/s10845-021-01796-x ↗
6. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AI10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012 ↗
7. Approximating XGBoost with an Interpretable Decision Tree10.1016/j.ins.2021.05.055 ↗
8. Evaluating XAI: A Comparison of Rule-Based and Example-Based Explanations10.1016/j.artint.2020.103404 ↗
9. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) Post-Hoc Explainability Methods: Risks and Limitations in Non-Discrimination Law10.1007/s43681-022-00142-y ↗
10. Lundberg, S., and Lee, S.-I. (2017, January 4–9). A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA.
11. Ribeiro, M.T., Singh, S., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). “Why Should I Trust You?”: Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.10.1145/2939672.2939778 ↗
12. Deep Learning10.1038/nature14539 ↗
13. Machine Learning and Deep Learning Based Predictive Quality in Manufacturing: A Systematic Review10.1007/s10845-022-01963-8 ↗
14. Review of Vision-Based Defect Detection Research and Its Perspectives for Printed Circuit Board10.1016/j.jmsy.2023.08.019 ↗
15. Tziolas, T., Theodosiou, T., Papageorgiou, K., Rapti, A., Dimitriou, N., Tzovaras, D., and Papageorgiou, E. (2022, January 18–20). Wafer Map Defect Pattern Recognition Using Imbalanced Datasets. Proceedings of the 2022 13th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems & Applications (IISA), Corfu, Greece.10.1109/IISA56318.2022.9904402 ↗
16. Recent Advances in Convolutional Neural Networks10.1016/j.patcog.2017.10.013 ↗
17. Explainable Convolutional Neural Networks: A Taxonomy, Review, and Future Directions10.1145/3563691 ↗
18. Xie, D., Wu, Z., Hai, J., and Economou, M. (June, January 29). Reliability Enhancement of Automotive Electronic Modules Using Various Glues. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 68th Electronic Components and Technology Conference (ECTC), San Diego, CA, USA.10.1109/ECTC.2018.00034 ↗
19. Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-Based Localization10.1007/s11263-019-01228-7 ↗
20. Sandler, M., Howard, A., Zhu, M., Zhmoginov, A., and Chen, L.-C. (2018, January 18–22). MobileNetV2: Inverted Residuals and Linear Bottlenecks. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Salt Lake City, UT, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2018.00474 ↗
21. Zhou, X., Wang, D., and Krähenbühl, P. (2019). Objects as Points. arXiv.
22. Chen, L., Li, S., Bai, Q., Yang, J., Jiang, S., and Miao, Y. (2021). Review of Image Classification Algorithms Based on Convolutional Neural Networks. Remote Sens., 13.10.3390/rs13224712 ↗
23. A Survey of Visual Transformers10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3227717 ↗
24. Maurício, J., Domingues, I., and Bernardino, J. (2023). Comparing Vision Transformers and Convolutional Neural Networks for Image Classification: A Literature Review. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app13095521 ↗
25. Simonyan, K., and Zisserman, A. (2015, January 7–9). Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2015), San Diego, CA, USA. Computational and Biological Learning Society.
26. Özdem, S., and Orak, İ.M. (2024). A Novel Method Based on Deep Learning Algorithms for Material Deformation Rate Detection. J. Intell. Manuf.10.1007/s10845-024-02409-z ↗
27. A Novel Approach of Tool Condition Monitoring in Sustainable Machining of Ni Alloy with Transfer Learning Models10.1007/s10845-023-02074-8 ↗
28. He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., and Sun, J. (2016, January 27–30). Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2016.90 ↗
29. Szegedy, C., Vanhoucke, V., Ioffe, S., Shlens, J., and Wojna, Z. (2016, January 27–30). Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Vision. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Las Vegas, NV, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2016.308 ↗
30. Howard, A.G., Zhu, M., Chen, B., Kalenichenko, D., Wang, W., Weyand, T., Andreetto, M., and Adam, H. (2017). MobileNets: Efficient Convolutional Neural Networks for Mobile Vision Applications. arXiv.
31. Deep Learning Methods for Object Detection in Smart Manufacturing: A Survey10.1016/j.jmsy.2022.06.011 ↗
32. Tan, M., Pang, R., and Le, Q.V. (2020, January 13–19). EfficientDet: Scalable and Efficient Object Detection. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Seattle, WA, USA.10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.01079 ↗
33. He, K., Gkioxari, G., Dollár, P., and Girshick, R. (2017, January 22–29). Mask R-CNN. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Venice, Italy.10.1109/ICCV.2017.322 ↗
34. Theodosiou, T., Tziolas, T., Papageorgiou, K., Rapti, A., Papageorgiou, E., Pantoja, S., Charalampous, P., Dimitriou, N., Tzovaras, D., and Cuiñas, A. (2023, January 3–5). Centernet-Based Models for the Detection of Defects in an Industrial Antenna Assembly Process. Proceedings of the 10th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Smart Structures and Materials, Patras, Greece.10.7712/150123.9869.444634 ↗
35. Zhou, B., Khosla, A., Lapedriza, A., Oliva, A., and Torralba, A. (2016, January 27–30). Learning Deep Features for Discriminative Localization. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Las Vegas, NV, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2016.319 ↗
36. Papandrianos, N.I., Feleki, A., Moustakidis, S., Papageorgiou, E.I., Apostolopoulos, I.D., and Apostolopoulos, D.J. (2022). An Explainable Classification Method of SPECT Myocardial Perfusion Images in Nuclear Cardiology Using Deep Learning and Grad-CAM. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12157592 ↗
37. Noh, E., and Hong, S. (2022). Automatic Screening of Bolts with Anti-Loosening Coating Using Grad-CAM and Transfer Learning with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12042029 ↗
38. Automatic Landslide Segmentation Using a Combination of Grad-CAM Visualization and K-Means Clustering Techniques10.1007/s40996-023-01193-9 ↗
39. Pham, T.T.A., Thoi, D.K.T., Choi, H., and Park, S. (2023). Defect Detection in Printed Circuit Boards Using Semi-Supervised Learning. Sensors, 23.10.3390/s23063246 ↗
40. Park, J.-H., Kim, Y.-S., Seo, H., and Cho, Y.-J. (2023). Analysis of Training Deep Learning Models for PCB Defect Detection. Sensors, 23.10.3390/s23052766 ↗
41. Shapley, L.S. (1953). A Value for N-Person Games, Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400881970-018 ↗
42. Shrikumar, A., Greenside, P., and Kundaje, A. (2017, January 6–11). Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differences. Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia.
43. Investigations on Explainable Artificial Intelligence Methods for the Deep Learning Classification of Fibre Layup Defect in the Automated Composite Manufacturing10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109160 ↗
44. Raab, D., Fezer, E., Breitenbach, J., Baumgartl, H., Sauter, D., and Buettner, R. (July, January 27). A Deep Learning-Based Model for Automated Quality Control in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 46th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), Los Alamitos, CA, USA.10.1109/COMPSAC54236.2022.00045 ↗
45. Glue Dispenser Route Inspection by Using Computer Vision and Neural Network10.1007/s00170-007-1285-4 ↗
46. Timofiejczuk, A., Lazarz, B.E., Chaari, F., and Burdzik, R. Image Processing Method for the Improvement of Visibility of Adhesive Path Defects. Proceedings of the Advances in Technical Diagnostics.
47. Zhang, R., Yan, T., and Zhang, J. (2025). Vision-Based Structural Adhesive Detection for Electronic Components on PCBs. Electronics, 14.10.3390/electronics14102045 ↗
48. An Enhancement and Detection Method for a Glue Dispensing Image Based on the CycleGAN Model10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3195499 ↗
49. Fault Diagnosis in Microelectronics Attachment via Deep Learning Analysis of 3-D Laser Scans10.1109/TIE.2019.2931220 ↗
50. A Deep Regression Framework Toward Laboratory Accuracy in the Shop Floor of Microelectronics10.1109/TII.2022.3182343 ↗
51. Abadi, M., Agarwal, A., Barham, P., Brevdo, E., Chen, Z., Citro, C., Corrado, G.S., Davis, A., Dean, J., and Devin, M. (2015). TensorFlow: Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Systems. arXiv.
52. Bradski, G. (2025, August 08). The OpenCV Library. Available online: https://opencv.org.
53. Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 ↗
54. A Systematic Review on Data Scarcity Problem in Deep Learning: Solution and Applications10.1145/3502287 ↗
55. Comparative Study of Hough Transform Methods for Circle Finding10.1016/0262-8856(90)90059-E ↗
56. Huang, J., Rathod, V., Sun, C., Zhu, M., Korattikara, A., Fathi, A., Fischer, I., Wojna, Z., Song, Y., and Guadarrama, S. (2017, January 21–26). Speed/Accuracy Trade-Offs for Modern Convolutional Object Detectors. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2017.351 ↗
57. The Pascal Visual Object Classes (VOC) Challenge10.1007/s11263-009-0275-4 ↗
58. Fleet, D., Pajdla, T., Schiele, B., and Tuytelaars, T. Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context. Proceedings of the Computer Vision—ECCV 2014.10.1007/978-3-319-10578-9 ↗
59. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2014). Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. arXiv.
60. Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection10.1109/TPAMI.2018.2858826 ↗
61. Shah, S.R., Qadri, S., Bibi, H., Shah, S.M.W., Sharif, M.I., and Marinello, F. (2023). Comparing Inception V3, VGG 16, VGG 19, CNN, and ResNet 50: A Case Study on Early Detection of a Rice Disease. Agronomy, 13.10.3390/agronomy13061633 ↗
62. Industrial Object and Defect Recognition Utilizing Multilevel Feature Extraction from Industrial Scenes with Deep Learning Approach10.1007/s12652-021-03688-7 ↗
63. A Comprehensive Survey on Transfer Learning10.1109/JPROC.2020.3004555 ↗
64. Scikit-Learn: Machine Learning in Python
65. Arai, K., and Kapoor, S. Deep Learning vs. Traditional Computer Vision. Proceedings of the Advances in Computer Vision.