A Defect-Inspection System Constructed by Applying Autoencoder with Clustered Latent Vectors and Multi-Thresholding Classification
Source abstract
Abstract
Defect inspection is an important issue in the field of industrial automation. In general, defect-inspection methods can be categorized into supervised and unsupervised methods. When supervised learning is applied to defect inspection, the large variation of defect patterns can make the data coverage incomplete for model training, which can introduce the problem of low detection accuracy. Therefore, this paper focuses on the construction of a defect-inspection system with an unsupervised learning model. Furthermore, few studies have focused on the analysis between the reconstruction error on the normal areas and the repair effect on the defective areas for unsupervised defect-inspection systems. Hence, this paper addresses this important issue. There are four main contributions to this paper. First, we compare the effects of SSIM (Structural Similarity Index Measure) and MSE (Mean Square Error) functions on the reconstruction error. Second, various kinds of Autoencoders are constructed by referring to the Inception architecture in GoogleNet and DEC (Deep Embedded Clustering) module. Third, two-stage model training is proposed to train the Autoencoder models. In the first stage, the Autoencoder models are trained to have basic image-reconstruction capabilities for the normal areas. In the second stage, the DEC algorithm is added to the training of the Autoencoder model to further strengthen feature discrimination and then increase the capability to repair defective areas. Fourth, the multi-thresholding image segmentation method is applied to improve the classification accuracy of normal and defect images. In this study, we focus on the defect inspection on the texture patterns. Therefore, we select the nanofiber image database and carpet and grid images in the MVTec database to conduct experiments. The experimental results show that the accuracy of classifying normal and defect patch nanofiber images is about 86% and the classification accuracy can approach 89% and 98% for carpet and grid datasets in the MVTec database, respectively. It is obvious that our proposed defect-inspection and classification system outperforms the methods in MVTec.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Advanced Neural Network Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Computer Science & Information Engineering, Chung Hua University, Hsinchu 30012, Taiwan
References (32)
Show source-provided references
1. Redmon, J., Divvala, S., Girshick, R., and Farhadi, A. (July, January 26). You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
2. Redmon, J., and Farhadi, A. (2017, January 21–26). Yolo9000: Better, faster, stronger. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2017.690 ↗
3. Redmon, J., and Farhadi, A. (2018). Yolov3: An incremental improvement. arXiv.
4. Bochkovskiy, A., Wang, C.Y., and Liao, H.Y.M. (2020). Yolov4: Optimal speed and accuracy of object detection. arXiv.
5. Tang, S., He, F., Huang, X., and Yang, J. (2019). Online PCB defect detector on a new PCB defect dataset. arXiv.
6. Zhang, C., Chang, C., and Jamshidi, M. (2018). Bridge damage detection using a single-stage detector and field inspection images. arXiv.
7. Real-time detection of steel strip surface defects based on improved yolo detection network10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.09.412 ↗
8. Fabric defect detection using the improved YOLOv3 model
9. Adibhatla, V.A., Chih, H.C., Hsu, C.C., Cheng, J., Abbod, M.F., and Shieh, J.S. (2020). Defect detection in printed circuit boards using You-Only-Look-Once convolutional neural networks. Electronics, 9.10.3390/electronics9091547 ↗
10. Segnet: A deep convolutional encoder-decoder architecture for image segmentation10.1109/TPAMI.2016.2644615 ↗
11. He, K., Gkioxari, G., Dollár, P., and Girshick, R. (2017, January 22–29). Mask r-cnn. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Venice, Italy.10.1109/ICCV.2017.322 ↗
12. One class based feature learning approach for defect detection using deep Autoencoders10.1016/j.aei.2019.100933 ↗
13. Multiscale feature-clustering-based fully convolutional Autoencoder for fast accurate visual inspection of texture surface defects10.1109/TASE.2018.2886031 ↗
14. Bergmann, P., Fauser, M., Sattlegger, D., and Steger, C. (2019, January 16–20). MVTec AD—A Comprehensive Real-World Dataset for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Long Beach, CA, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2019.00982 ↗
15. Bank, D., Koenigstein, N., and Giryes, R. (2020). Autoencoders. arXiv.
16. Bergmann, P., Löwe, S., Fauser, M., Sattlegger, D., and Steger, C. (2019, January 25–27). Improving unsupervised defect segmentation by applying structural similarity to Autoencoders. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications, Prague, Czech Republic.10.5220/0007364500002108 ↗
17. Real-time implementation of fabric defect detection based on variational automatic encoder with structure similarity10.1007/s11554-020-01023-5 ↗
18. Kingma, D.P., and Welling, M. (2014, January 14–16). Auto-encoding variational bayes. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), Banff, AB, Canada.
19. Doersch, C. (2016). Tutorial on variational Autoencoders. arXiv.
20. On information and sufficiency10.1214/aoms/1177729694 ↗
21. Liu, W., Li, R., Zheng, M., Karanam, S., Wu, Z., Bhanu, B., Radke, R.J., and Camps, O. (2020, January 14–19). Towards visually explaining variational Autoencoders. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Virtual.10.1109/CVPR42600.2020.00867 ↗
22. Dilokthanakul, N., Mediano, P.A., Garnelo, M., Lee, M.C., Salimbeni, H., Arulkumaran, K., and Shanahan, M. (2016). Deep unsupervised clustering with Gaussian mixture variational Autoencoders. arXiv.
23. Xie, J., Girshick, R., and Farhadi, A. (2016, January 19–24). Unsupervised deep embedding for clustering analysis. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), New York, NY, USA.
24. Szegedy, C., Liu, W., Jia, Y., Sermanet, P., Reed, S., Anguelov, D., Erhan, D., Vanhoucke, V., and Rabinovich, A. (2015, January 7–12). Going deeper with convolutions. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston, MA, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2015.7298594 ↗
25. Ioffe, S., and Szegedy, C. (2015, January 6–11). Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), Lille, France.
26. Szegedy, C., Vanhoucke, V., Ioffe, S., Shlens, J., and Wojna, Z. (July, January 26). Rethinking the Inception architecture for computer vision. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, VA, USA.
27. Szegedy, C., Ioffe, S., Vanhoucke, V., and Alemi, A. (2016, January 12–17). Inception-v4, Inception-resnet and the impact of residual connections on learning. Proceedings of the Thirty-First AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), Phoenix, AZ, USA.10.1609/aaai.v31i1.11231 ↗
28. Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity10.1109/TIP.2003.819861 ↗
29. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2015, January 7–9). Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), San Diego, CA, USA.
30. A fast algorithm for multilevel thresholding
31. Morse, B.S. (2000). Lecture 4: Thresholding, Brigham Young University.
32. Defect detection in SEM images of nanofibrous materials10.1109/TII.2016.2641472 ↗