ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Comparison of Deep Transfer Learning Against Contrastive Learning in Industrial Quality Applications for Heavily Unbalanced Data Scenarios When Data Augmentation Is Limited.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AI-oriented quality inspection in manufacturing often faces highly imbalanced data, as defective products are rare, and there are limited possibilities for data augmentation. This paper presents a systematic comparison between Deep Transfer Learning (DTL) and Contrastive Learning (CL) under such challenging conditions, addressing a critical gap in the industrial machine learning literature. We focus on a galvanized steel coil quality classification task with acceptable vs. defective classes, where the vast majority of samples (>95%) are acceptable. We implement a DTL approach using strategically fine-tuned YOLOv8 models pre-trained on large-scale datasets, and a CL approach using a Siamese network with multi-reference design to learn robust similarity metrics for one-shot classification. Experiments employ k-fold cross-validation and a held-out gold-standard test set of coil images, with statistical validation through bootstrap resampling. Results demonstrate that DTL significantly outperforms CL, achieving higher overall accuracy (81.7% vs. 61.6%), F1-score (79.2% vs. 62.1%), and precision (91.3% vs. 61.0%) on the challenging test set. Computational analysis reveals that DTL requires 40% less training time and 25% fewer parameters while maintaining superior generalization capabilities. We provide concrete guidance on when to select DTL over CL based on dataset characteristics, demonstrating that DTL is particularly advantageous when data augmentation is constrained by domain-specific spatial patterns. Additionally, we introduce a novel adaptive inspection framework that integrates human-in-the-loop feedback with domain adaptation techniques for continuous model improvement in production environments. Our comprehensive comparative analysis offers empirically validated insights into performance trade-offs between these approaches under extreme class imbalance, providing valuable direction for practitioners implementing industrial quality inspection systems with limited, skewed datasets.
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.