ArticleData in brief2024
FabricSpotDefect: An annotated dataset for identifying spot defects in different fabric types.
Article in Data in brief, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explainable transformer framework for fast cotton leaf diagnostics and fabric defect detection.iScience · 2026Article
- FabricSpotDefect: An annotated dataset for identifying spot defects in different fabric types.Data in brief · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The FabricSpotDefect dataset is, to the best of our knowledge, the first dataset specifically designed to accurately challenge computer vision in detecting fabric spots. There are a total of 1014 raw images and manually annotated 3288 different categories of spots. This dataset expands to 2300 augmented images after applying six categories of augmentation techniques like flipping, rotating, shearing, saturation adjustment, brightness adjustment, and noise addition. We manually conducted annotations on original images to provide real-world essence rather than augmented images. Two versions are considered for augmented images, one is YOLOv8 resulting in 7641 annotations and another one is COCO format resulting in 7635 annotations. To reduce overfitting and to improve model robustness augmentation technique is required, which eventually increases data diversity. This dataset consists of various types of fabrics such as cotton, linen, silk, denim, patterned textiles, jacquard fabrics, and so on, and spots like stains, discolorations, oil marks, rust, blood marks, and so on. These kinds of spots are quite difficult to detect manually or in other traditional methods. The images were snapped in home lights, using basic everyday clothes, and in normal conditions, making this FabricSpotDefect dataset established in real-world applications. The dataset is organized in a way that makes it easy to use for training, testing, and validating machine learning (ML) models and can be reused at any time since this dataset is real and authentic. Researchers and Developers are free to use this prebuilt dataset to work with artificial intelligence (AI) tools that enhance quality control in the textile industry, such as checking the quality of fabrics used in clothing or medical textiles such as surgical gloves, masks, gauze and aprons and so on. The data is annotated with bounding boxes and polygons to precisely mark spot defects. This dataset is available in Roboflow with various formats like COCO and YOLOv8, which work with different ML frameworks. We strongly claim that our dataset is unique because it covers a wide range of fabrics and challenging spot defects often found in patterned and colorful prints, where spotting defects is especially difficult due to the complexity of the printed fabrics.
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.