ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
A Deep Learning System for Recognizing and Recovering Contaminated Slider Serial Numbers in Hard Disk Manufacturing Processes.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This paper outlines a system for detecting printing errors and misidentifications on hard disk drive sliders, which may contribute to shipping tracking problems and incorrect product delivery to end users. A deep-learning-based technique is proposed for determining the printed identity of a slider serial number from images captured by a digital camera. Our approach starts with image preprocessing methods that deal with differences in lighting and printing positions and then progresses to deep learning character detection based on the You-Only-Look-Once (YOLO) v4 algorithm and finally character classification. For character classification, four convolutional neural networks (CNN) were compared for accuracy and effectiveness: DarkNet-19, EfficientNet-B0, ResNet-50, and DenseNet-201. Experimenting on almost 15,000 photographs yielded accuracy greater than 99% on four CNN networks, proving the feasibility of the proposed technique. The EfficientNet-B0 network outperformed highly qualified human readers with the best recovery rate (98.4%) and fastest inference time (256.91 ms).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.