ArticleMicromachines2024
Classification of LED Packages for Quality Control by Discriminant Analysis, Neural Network and Decision Tree.
Article in Micromachines, 2024. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates supervised learning to improve LED classification. A hardware system for testing was built. The data for learning were acquired and then analyzed to show their characteristics. An LED was tested, and the results were categorized into three defective LED groups and one normal LED group. Before classification, electrical and optical data were examined to identify their characteristics. To find out the best way for quality control, an ensemble of methods was used. First, the discriminant analysis using the validation data achieved a 77.9% true positive rate for normal products, inadequate for quality control. Second, neural network-based learning boosted this rate to 97.8%, but the 2.2% false negative rate remained problematic. Finally, a binary decision tree was constructed, achieving a 99.4% true positive rate from just 14 splits, proving highly effective in product classification. The training time was measured as 8.1, 18.2 and 8.2 s for discriminant analysis, neural network and decision tree, respectively. This work has found the binary decision tree is advantageous considering both learning and classification efficiencies.
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.