ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Training-Label Efficiency in Vision-Based Inspection of LNG Tank Cables: A Duplicate-Aware and Calibration-Controlled Benchmark of Supervised and Normal-Only Anomaly Detection.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
Vision-based sensing is increasingly important for liquefied natural gas (LNG) tank manufacturing, where missed defects in cable-related components can affect monitoring, control, and safety functions. However, industrial image datasets often contain duplicate or near-duplicate imagery, operating thresholds can be optimistically tuned on held-out test data, and abnormal labels are costly to obtain. This study evaluates LNG tank cable defect detection under a duplicate-aware and calibration-controlled protocol that separates model training, threshold calibration, and held-out testing. Using the AI-Hub LNG tank quality inspection image dataset, we compare ResNet-18, EfficientNet-B0, and ConvNeXt-Tiny supervised classifiers; PatchCore, PaDiM, and STFPM normal-only training anomaly detectors; and ResNet-18 training-label-budget experiments that retain all normal training images while varying the number of labeled abnormal training images used for model fitting. Across 36 de-duplicated final runs, EfficientNet-B0 achieved the strongest fully supervised performance (AUROC 0.9999±0.0001, F1 0.9956±0.0029). PatchCore was the best normal-only training anomaly detector (AUROC 0.8909±0.0109, F1 0.8666±0.0228). In the percentage-budget experiment, 1% labeled abnormal training samples already exceeded PatchCore in AUROC, F1, and false-negative rate under the fixed labeled-calibration protocol; in a finer 4-64 abnormal-training-label sweep with 90 runs, the first training budget exceeding PatchCore across AUROC, F1, and false-negative rate with 16 labeled abnormal training images. These results quantify abnormal training-label efficiency under a fixed labeled-calibration protocol, rather than the total abnormal annotation burden required to deploy the complete operating classifier.
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.