ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
A Deep Transfer Learning-Based Visual Inspection System for Assembly Defects in Similar Types of Manual Tool Products.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
- Optimized image preprocessing strategies for enhanced neural network-based defect detection in industrial automation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparison of Deep Transfer Learning Against Contrastive Learning in Industrial Quality Applications for Heavily Unbalanced Data Scenarios When Data Augmentation Is Limited.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study introduces an advanced inspection system for manual tool assembly, focusing on defect detection and classification in flex-head ratchet wrenches as a modern alternative to traditional inspection methods. Using a deep learning R-CNN approach with transfer learning, specifically utilizing the AlexNet architecture, the system accurately identifies and classifies assembly defects across similar tools. This study demonstrates how a pre-trained defect detection model for older manual tool models can be efficiently adapted to new models with only moderate amounts of new samples and fine-tuning. Experimental evaluations at three assembly stations show that the AlexNet model achieves a classification accuracy of 98.67% at the station with the highest defect variety, outperforming the R-CNN model with randomly initialized weights. Even with a 40% reduction in sample size for new products, the AlexNet model maintains a classification accuracy of 98.66%. Additionally, compared to R-CNN, it improves average effectiveness by 9% and efficiency by 26% across all stations. A sensitivity analysis further reveals that the proposed method reduces training samples by 50% at 50% similarity while enhancing effectiveness by 13.06% and efficiency by 5.31%.
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.