ArticlePloS one2025
A surface defect detection method for electronic products based on improved YOLOv11.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional manual inspection approaches face challenges due to the reliance on the experience and alertness of operators, which limits their ability to meet the growing demands for efficiency and precision in modern manufacturing processes. Deep learning techniques, particularly in object detection, have shown significant promise for various applications. This paper proposes an improved YOLOv11-based method for surface defect detection in electronic products, aiming to address the limitations of existing YOLO models in handling complex backgrounds and small target defects. By introducing the MD-C2F module, DualConv module, and Inner_MPDIoU loss function, the improved YOLOv11 model has achieved significant improvements in precision, recall rate, detection speed, and other aspects. The improved YOLOv11 model demonstrates notable improvements in performance, with a precision increase from 90.9% to 93.1%, and a recall rate improvement from 77.0% to 84.6%. Furthermore, it shows a 4.6% rise in mAP50, from 84.0% to 88.6%. When compared to earlier YOLO versions such as YOLOv7, YOLOv8, and YOLOv9, the improved YOLOv11 achieves a significantly higher precision of 89.3% in resistor detection, surpassing YOLOv7's 54.3% and YOLOv9's 88.0%. In detecting defects like LED lights and capacitors, the improved YOLOv11 reaches mAP50 values of 77.8% and 85.3%, respectively, both outperforming the other models. Additionally, in the generalization tests conducted on the PKU-Market-PCB dataset, the model's detection accuracy improved from 91.4% to 94.6%, recall from 82.2% to 91.2%, and mAP50 from 91.8% to 95.4%.These findings emphasize that the proposed YOLOv11 model successfully tackles the challenges of detecting small defects in complex backgrounds and across varying scales. It significantly enhances detection accuracy, recall, and generalization ability, offering a dependable automated solution for defect detection in electronic product manufacturing.
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.