ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Unraveling False Positives in Unsupervised Defect Detection Models: A Study on Anomaly-Free Training Datasets.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A two-stage defect detection method for unevenly illuminated self-adhesive printed materials.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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
Unsupervised defect detection methods have garnered substantial attention in industrial defect detection owing to their capacity to circumvent complex fault sample collection. However, these models grapple with establishing a robust boundary between normal and abnormal conditions in intricate scenarios, leading to a heightened frequency of false-positive predictions. Spurious alerts exacerbate the work of reconfirmation and impede the widespread adoption of unsupervised anomaly detection models in industrial applications. To this end, we delve into the sole available data source in unsupervised defect detection models, the unsupervised training dataset, to introduce a solution called the False Alarm Identification (FAI) method aimed at learning the distribution of potential false alarms using anomaly-free images. It exploits a multi-layer perceptron to capture the semantic information of potential false alarms from a detector trained on anomaly-free training images at the object level. During the testing phase, the FAI model operates as a post-processing module applied after the baseline detection algorithm. The FAI algorithm determines whether each positive patch predicted by the normalizing flow algorithm is a false alarm by its semantic features. When a positive prediction is identified as a false alarm, the corresponding pixel-wise predictions are set to negative. The effectiveness of the FAI method is demonstrated by two state-of-the-art normalizing flow algorithms on extensive industrial applications.
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.