Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 43 references

Research on Defect Detection Method of Motor Control Board Based on Image Processing

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Threshold-based image processing separates standard, defective, and color-difference motor control boards with over 99 percent accuracy on the tested batches.

desk verdict A workmanlike industrial-vision pipeline whose headline >99% accuracy is undermined by inconsistent tables, no held-out evaluation, and unreleased data/code. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.17493 v1 pith:KLRNUS65 submitted 2025-05-23 cs.CV

Jingde Huang , Zhangyu Huang , Chenyu Li , Jiantong Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords motorcontrolboarddefectdetectionimageprocessingmachinevisionHSVcolorspacethresholdsegmentationdifferenceCannyedge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to show that a compact image-processing pipeline, rather than a trained deep network, can inspect finished motor control boards on a production line and sort them into qualified, defective, and color-difference groups. The method converts board images to grayscale and then to HSV color space, extracts features from two hand-selected regions of interest, and classifies each board by a fixed brightness threshold. On 1,000 boards labeled by hand, the reported accuracy is over 99 percent across the standard, defect, and color-difference groups, and a barcode-reading test on 500 boards reports 100 percent accuracy. If these numbers hold, the approach offers a fast and easily retargetable quality-control step for circuit-board manufacturing.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a fixed brightness threshold in HSV color space: after Gaussian denoising and RGB-to-HSV conversion, the system reads the average V (brightness) of two hand-selected regions, ROI_0 and ROI_1, and classifies a board as qualified only if both values exceed 150. Around this decision rule sit supporting operations: Canny edge extraction with non-maximum suppression and a Tukey weight function for geometric features, template matching via SAD and SSD for feature recognition, and ant-colony optimization to narrow the search for defective images. The paper's accuracy claim rests on this threshold and on the choice of the two regions.

What would settle it

Take the same boards and photograph them under two different lighting intensities; if boards that are labeled 'color difference' under one light pass the V > 150 threshold under the other, the fixed cutoff is not stable. Alternatively, have independent inspectors re-label the same 1,000 boards and compare; the reported accuracy is measured against the original labels, so disagreement would change the accuracy estimate.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that defect detection of a motor control board can be reduced to a small set of image-processing operations with threshold-based decisions. After Gaussian filtering suppresses noise, the color image is converted from RGB to HSV, and two regions of interest on the board are examined: if the average brightness V of each region is greater than 150, the board is judged qualified, otherwise it is judged defective on color difference. Surface defects such as wrong plug-in positions and solder short circuits are handled by Canny edge extraction and feature comparison using template matching with SAD and SSD similarity measures, while an ant-colony search is used to compress image data and speed up the location of defective regions. The experiments then report accuracy above 99 percent: 99.62 percent in a pre-experiment, 100 percent in a four-group small batch, and between 99.67 and 99.93 percent in four larger batches, with barcode recognition on 500 boards reported at 100 percent. The authors conclude the model is suitable for timely, on-line inspection of large quantities of motor control boards.

Load-bearing premise

The accuracy numbers assume the manual sorting of the 1,000 boards into standard, defect, and color-difference groups is correct, and that the fixed brightness cutoff of 150 stays valid across lighting conditions and board batches.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same threshold-based workflow can be applied to different control-board types by editing the regions of interest, so retargeting requires geometry rather than retraining.
  • With a PLC-controlled robotic arm, boards failing the threshold are removed automatically, so the method is compatible with an automated production line.
  • The barcode recognition result of 100 percent on 500 boards indicates the barcode-area localization step is reliable under the tested conditions.
  • Accuracy above 99 percent in the reported batches is the evidence the authors offer for using the method as a fast, low-cost alternative to manual appearance inspection.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural next test is to vary illumination while holding the V > 150 rule fixed; because the rule is a single absolute threshold, its robustness to lighting is the main untested engineering question.
  • The reported accuracy is measured against hand-made labels, so a stricter evaluation would compare the same images against independent expert re-inspection and inter-rater agreement.
  • The pipeline could be benchmarked against deep-learning detectors on a public PCB-defect dataset with per-class precision and recall; the paper reports overall accuracy but not per-defect-type rates.
  • For production use, the system may work best as a first-stage screener: images that fall near the threshold could be routed to a human operator instead of being classified automatically.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript proposes an image-processing pipeline for detecting defects on motor control boards. The pipeline includes Gaussian filtering, grayscale conversion, HSV color-space feature extraction on two hand-selected regions of interest (ROI_0 and ROI_1), a brightness threshold (V>150) for classifying color-difference defects, Canny edge detection for geometric features, barcode recognition, and an ant colony optimization-based search for defect images. The authors report experiments on 1000 boards divided into standard, defect, and color-difference groups, with claimed accuracy above 99%, and they conclude that the method is suitable for production-line inspection.

Significance. If the central claim were fully supported, the contribution would be a simple, low-cost, real-time inspection method for a specific industrial task, with practical value for motor control board manufacturers. The strengths of the manuscript are that it describes a complete working system, reports concrete counts on physical boards, and includes a barcode recognition test on 500 images (Table 2). However, the scientific significance is limited by the absence of a statistically rigorous evaluation: the accuracy numbers are computed in-sample, no confidence intervals or per-class error breakdowns are given, and the reported accuracy columns in Tables 4 and 6 are inconsistent with the corresponding counts. The method itself combines standard image-processing operators and does not introduce a fundamentally new algorithmic idea.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, Tables 4-6, abstract] The >99% accuracy claim is not supported as stated because the decision rule is evaluated in-sample. Section 4.1 step 9 fixes the brightness threshold (V>150) for ROI_0 and ROI_1, and the ROI positions are hand-selected; Tables 4-6 then report accuracy on the same data without a held-out calibration/test split, cross-validation, or sensitivity analysis. This does not establish that the threshold generalizes to new batches or lighting conditions, which is a prerequisite for the production-line claim in the abstract and Conclusion (3).
  2. [Table 6 (also Table 4)] The 'Accuracy' column in Table 6 is arithmetically inconsistent with the counts in the same row. For group 1, (1498+500+500)/2500 = 99.92%, but the table reports 99.87%; the reported value equals 1498/1500, the standard-group accuracy. The same pattern holds for groups 2-4. Similarly, Table 4 reports 99.62%, which equals the color-difference group accuracy (4981/5000), while the overall accuracy from the table's counts is 99.84%. These columns should be recomputed or explicitly relabeled as per-group/class accuracies.
  3. [Sec. 3.7] The statement that '800 sample images' were processed 'with an accuracy rate of over 99%' is unsupported: no table, confusion matrix, per-class breakdown, or definition of the sample is provided anywhere in the manuscript. This claim should be removed or substantiated with the same level of detail as Tables 4-6.
  4. [Sec. 4.2] The ground-truth labels dividing the 1000 boards into standard, defect, and color-difference groups are assigned by the authors with no independent verification, no inter-rater agreement measure, and no explicit quantitative criterion for what constitutes a 'significant color difference' (the threshold V>150 is the decision rule, not the labeling criterion). Since every accuracy number is computed against these labels, label uncertainty directly propagates into the reported accuracy.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 1] The focal length f is listed as 0 mm for both cameras, which is physically implausible; please correct or clarify the units/values.
  2. [Sec. 2.2, Eqs. (1)-(3)] Equations (1)-(3) contain corrupted Greek symbols and brackets; the transition probability and pheromone update formulas should be typeset correctly.
  3. [Sec. 3.6, Eq. (24)] Equation (24) is garbled ('GMinMultAddGMinMaxMult *,G 255 − = − ='); please rewrite the grayscale stretching formula cleanly.
  4. [Sec. 4.2] The 'Log-rank' test mentioned in Section 4.2 is not defined; please specify the statistical procedure and what hypothesis it tests.
  5. [Secs. 3.7 and 4.2] The 'time tolerance test' referenced in Sections 3.7 and 4.2 is not described and no timing results are reported; please add a description or remove the reference.
  6. [References] Reference [35] is a CSDN blog post; a peer-reviewed source for the HSV color space would be more appropriate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the accuracy claims are empirical evaluations, not self-referential derivations, and the self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

This paper's central claim is that a threshold-based image-processing system reaches over 99% accuracy on motor-control-board defect detection. The accuracy is an experimental measurement: Section 4.1 describes a fixed decision rule (brightness features of ROI_0 and ROI_1 compared against a threshold of 150), and Tables 4-6 report the agreement between that rule and manually assigned standard/defect/color-difference labels. Nothing in the quoted equations defines the threshold or ROIs as functions of the reported accuracy, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. The self-citations ([26] for noise suppression, [34] for HSV color-space use) are background references to standard techniques and are not used to justify the empirical result. The lack of a separate calibration/test split and the arithmetic inconsistency in Table 6's "Accuracy" column (group 1 correctly identifies 1498+500+500=2498/2500=99.92%, not 99.87%) are correctness/validation concerns, not circularity. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited under the required standard.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Every accuracy number in the paper depends on at least one hand-set value (brightness 150, barcode area ratio, Canny thresholds, Gaussian sigma, ACO constants) and on unverified assumptions about label correctness and dataset representativeness. No independent calibration split, sensitivity analysis, code, or dataset is provided, so the central claim rests on an unquantified stack of manual choices.

free parameters (8)
  • Brightness pass threshold for ROI_0 and ROI_1 = 150 (V channel)
    Section 4.1 step (9) sets a fixed threshold to classify color-difference boards as qualified; no sensitivity analysis or independent calibration set is reported.
  • Barcode black-to-white area ratio bounds = 0.7 to 1.5
    Section 3.5 uses this hand-set interval to decide whether a region is a barcode; it affects localization and downstream recognition.
  • Canny hysteresis thresholds and sigma = not reported
    Section 3.5 Step 2 requires high threshold T_H and low threshold T_L; values are not given, yet edge extraction feeds all geometry detection.
  • Gaussian filter sigma = not reported
    Section 3.1 chooses Gaussian filtering for denoising, but sigma and kernel size are unspecified while the whole preprocessing depends on them.
  • ACO control parameters alpha, beta, rho, H, m = not reported
    Equations (1)-(3) in Section 2.2 define the ACO search; no values are given and no ablation shows the optimization improves defect search.
  • Grayscale stretch parameters Mult and Add = not reported
    Section 3.6 uses scale_image with Mult and Add for barcode enhancement; values are not specified.
  • Tukey robust fitting cutoff tau = not reported
    Section 3.5 Eq. (21) uses tau as the distance threshold for down-weighting outliers during line fitting; the value is unspecified.
  • ROI_0 and ROI_1 placements = not reported
    The two regions of interest are chosen by hand in Section 4.1 steps 4-9; their coordinates are not published, and the detection result depends on them.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The pinhole camera model and binocular calibration equations map world points to image pixels correctly.
    Section 2.1 relies on camera calibration to obtain undistorted images for later defect detection.
  • domain assumption The manual labels grouping 1000 boards into standard, defect, and color-difference groups are correct ground truth.
    Section 4.2 Table 3 and Tables 4-6 treat these labels as truth; no independent inspection or inter-rater check is provided.
  • domain assumption The DeepPCB dataset annotations are valid ground truth for motor control board defects.
    Section 3.7 uses the public DeepPCB dataset to report over 99% accuracy, but that dataset is general PCB imagery and no annotation protocol is described.
  • ad hoc to paper The brightness or V feature of two selected ROIs is a sufficient statistic for color-difference qualification.
    Section 4.1 step (9) reduces color-difference detection to V greater than 150 in ROI_0 and ROI_1; no justification for ignoring hue, saturation, or other regions is given.
  • domain assumption Image noise in the acquisition is approximately Gaussian, making Gaussian filtering the right preprocessing choice.
    Section 3.1 selects Gaussian filtering based on qualitative comparison; no noise statistics are measured.
  • domain assumption A barcode region can be identified from the black-to-white area ratio alone.
    Section 3.5 declares a region a barcode when the black-white area ratio is between 0.7 and 1.5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Research on Defect Detection Method of Motor Control Board Based on Image Processing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KLRNUS65

@misc{pith2026250517493,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Research on Defect Detection Method of Motor Control Board Based on Image Processing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KLRNUS65}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.17493}
}
read the original abstract

The motor control board has various defects such as inconsistent color differences, incorrect plug-in positions, solder short circuits, and more. These defects directly affect the performance and stability of the motor control board, thereby having a negative impact on product quality. Therefore, studying the defect detection technology of the motor control board is an important means to improve the quality control level of the motor control board. Firstly, the processing methods of digital images about the motor control board were studied, and the noise suppression methods that affect image feature extraction were analyzed. Secondly, a specific model for defect feature extraction and color difference recognition of the tested motor control board was established, and qualified or defective products were determined based on feature thresholds. Thirdly, the search algorithm for defective images was optimized. Finally, comparative experiments were conducted on the typical motor control board, and the experimental results demonstrate that the accuracy of the motor control board defect detection model-based on image processing established in this paper reached over 99%. It is suitable for timely image processing of large quantities of motor control boards on the production line, and achieved efficient defect detection. The defect detection method can not only be used for online detection of the motor control board defects, but also provide solutions for the integrated circuit board defect processing for the industry.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. L. Chang and K. M. Lin. Smart agricultural machine with a computer vision-based weeding and variable-rate irrigation scheme. Robotics, 2018, 7: 38-55

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Automated surface defect detection framework using machine vision and convolutional neural networks

    Singh, S.A., Desai, K.A. Automated surface defect detection framework using machine vision and convolutional neural networks. J Intell Manuf, 2023, 34: 1995–2011

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Surface defect detection algorithm of high temperature casting slab based on improved yolov5s

    Liang Y, Wu J. Surface defect detection algorithm of high temperature casting slab based on improved yolov5s. Metalurgija, 2025, 64(1-2): 94–96

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Kwan and B

    C. Kwan and B. Budavari. A high-performance approach to detecting small targets in long-range low-quality infrared videos. Signal Image Video Process, 2022, 16 (1): 93-101

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Deep Convolution Neural Network for Image Recognition

    Traore B.B., Kamsu-Foguem B., Tangara F. Deep Convolution Neural Network for Image Recognition. Ecol. Inform, 2018, 48: 257–268

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    EFFD: An Unsupervised Surface Defect Detection Method Based on Estimation and Fusion of Normal Sample Feature Distribution

    Gao YH, Han ZY, Wang J. EFFD: An Unsupervised Surface Defect Detection Method Based on Estimation and Fusion of Normal Sample Feature Distribution. IEEE Sensors Journal, 2025, 25 (1): 1104-1120

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    YOLO-v1 to YOLO-v8, the rise of YOLO and its complementary nature toward digital manufacturing and industrial defect detection

    Hussain M. YOLO-v1 to YOLO-v8, the rise of YOLO and its complementary nature toward digital manufacturing and industrial defect detection. Machines, 2023, 11(7): 677

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    AM YOLO: adaptive multi-scale YOLO for ship instance

    Yuan M, Meng H, Wu JB. AM YOLO: adaptive multi-scale YOLO for ship instance. Journal of Real-time Image Processing, 2024, 21 (4): 100

    work page 2024

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Performance evaluation of YOLOv2 and modified YOLOv2 using face mask detection

    Parupalli S, Akhsitha S, Naval D, Kasam P, Yavagiri S. Performance evaluation of YOLOv2 and modified YOLOv2 using face mask detection. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2024, 83 (10): 30167-30180

    2024

  2. [10]

    WHO-YOLO NET: soil prediction and classification based on YOLOV3 with whale optimization

    Subramani S, Suganthi N. WHO-YOLO NET: soil prediction and classification based on YOLOV3 with whale optimization. Signal Image and Video Processing, 2024, 18 (4): 3495-3507

    2024

  3. [11]

    YOLOv7F: enhanced yolov7 with guided feature fusion

    Kim H, Park S, Kim H, Ahn J, Lee TY, Ha Y, Choi B. YOLOv7F: enhanced yolov7 with guided feature fusion. IEEE Access, 2024, 12: 169487-169498

    2024

  4. [12]

    Algorithmic scheme for concurrent detection and classification of printed circuit board defects

    Onshaunjit J, Srinonchat J. Algorithmic scheme for concurrent detection and classification of printed circuit board defects. Comput. Mater. Continua, 2022, 71(1): 355-367

    2022

  5. [13]

    Machine vision based PCB fault detection method

    Zhou Xiaowei, Chen Hua. Machine vision based PCB fault detection method. Electronic Testing, 2021, 10: 40-41

    2021

  6. [14]

    A Novel Hybrid Optical Imaging Sensor for Early Stage Short-Circuit Fault Diagnosis in Printed Circuit Boards

    Kaya GU. A Novel Hybrid Optical Imaging Sensor for Early Stage Short-Circuit Fault Diagnosis in Printed Circuit Boards. Traitement Du Signal, 2024, 41 (1): 531-542

    2024

  7. [15]

    Y. Song, Z. Xie, X. Wang and Y. Zou. MS-YOLO: Object detection based on YOLOv5 optimized fusion millimeter-wave radar and machine vision. IEEE Sensors Journal, 2022, 22 (15): 15435-15447

    2022

  8. [16]

    Improved normalized cross-correlation for defect detection in printed-circuit boards

    Annaby M H, Fouda Y M, Rushdi M A. Improved normalized cross-correlation for defect detection in printed-circuit boards. IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, 2019, 32 (2): 199-211

    2019

  9. [17]

    Kumari Rima, Prabhakar Roshan, Samadder Sukha Ranjan. Enhanced copper extraction from waste printed circuit boards using glycine after supercritical methanol pre-treatment: Process optimization, leaching kinetics, and thermodynamic analysis. Waste management (New York, N.Y.), ...

    2025

  10. [18]

    Rapid global calibration technology for hybrid visual inspection system

    Liu Tao, Yin Shibi, Guo Yin, Zhu Jigui. Rapid global calibration technology for hybrid visual inspection system. Sensors, 2017, 17(6): 1440

    2017

  11. [19]

    FM-STDNet: High-Speed detector for fast-moving small targets based on deep first-order network architecture

    Hu Xinyu, Kong Defeng, Liu Xiyang, Zhang Junwei, Zhang Daode. FM-STDNet: High-Speed detector for fast-moving small targets based on deep first-order network architecture. Electronics, 2023,12(8): 1829

    2023

  12. [20]

    Enhancing Vision-Based Structural Displacement Measurement of Civil Structures Through Optical Multiplexing

    Whelan M, Park Y. Enhancing Vision-Based Structural Displacement Measurement of Civil Structures Through Optical Multiplexing. Dynamics Of Civil Structures, 2025, 2:141-149

    2025

  13. [21]

    Camera-LiDAR Extrinsic Calibration Using Constrained Optimization With Circle Placement

    Kim D, Shin S, Hwang H. Camera-LiDAR Extrinsic Calibration Using Constrained Optimization With Circle Placement. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2025, 10 (2): 883-890

    2025

  14. [22]

    Flat mirrors, virtual rear-view cameras, and camera-mirror calibration

    Juarez-Salazar R. Flat mirrors, virtual rear-view cameras, and camera-mirror calibration. Optik, 2024, 317: 172067

    2024

  15. [23]

    Methods of detecting defects using infrared thermography

    Kolecka O. Methods of detecting defects using infrared thermography. Przeglad Elektrotechniczny, 2024, 100(4): 101- 104. 17

    2024

  16. [24]

    Ant Colony Optimization based Support Vector Machine for Improved Classification of Unbalanced Datasets

    Manakkadu S., Dutta, S.. Ant Colony Optimization based Support Vector Machine for Improved Classification of Unbalanced Datasets. Procedia Computer Science, 2024, 237: 586-593

    2024

  17. [25]

    PG-MACO Optimization Method for Ship Pipeline Layout

    Yan Lin, Tingyu Jin, Yuchao Yang. PG-MACO Optimization Method for Ship Pipeline Layout. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University, 2024, 58 (7): 1027-1035

    2024

  18. [26]

    Research on weak signal detection method for power system fault based on improved wavelet threshold

    Huang, JD; Ling, L and Xiao, QX. Research on weak signal detection method for power system fault based on improved wavelet threshold. Energy Reports, 2022, 8: 290-296

    2022

  19. [27]

    F. Yin, Z. Lin, Q. Kong, Y. Xu, D. Li S. Theodoridis and S. Cui. FedLoc: Federated learning framework for data-driven cooperative localization and location data processing. IEEE Open J. Signal Process, 2020, 1: 187–215

    2020

  20. [28]

    Online painting image clustering for the mental health of college art students based on improved CNN and SMOTE

    Ma F, Li H. Online painting image clustering for the mental health of college art students based on improved CNN and SMOTE. PeerJ Computer Science, 2023, 9: 1462

    2023

  21. [29]

    Network Security Perception System Integrating Improved CNN Algorithm and Improved GRU Algorithm

    Huang Y, Zhao ZY, Shi CB. Network Security Perception System Integrating Improved CNN Algorithm and Improved GRU Algorithm. IEEE Access, 2024, 12: 163805-163818

    2024

  22. [30]

    A real-time approach for automatic defect detection from PCBs based on SURF features and morphological operations

    Hassanin A A I M, Abd El-Samie F E, El Banby G M. A real-time approach for automatic defect detection from PCBs based on SURF features and morphological operations. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2019, 78: 34437-34457

    2019

  23. [31]

    Detection of PCB surface defects with improved Faster R-CNN and feature pyramid network

    Hu B, Wang J. Detection of PCB surface defects with improved Faster R-CNN and feature pyramid network. IEEE Access, 2020, 8: 108335-108345

    2020

  24. [32]

    Industrial Tracking Camera and Product Vision Detection System

    Abbood W.T., Hussein H.K., Abdullah O.I. Industrial Tracking Camera and Product Vision Detection System. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Research and Developments, 2019, 42 (4): 277-280

    2019

  25. [33]

    A small object detection algorithm of remote sensing image based on improved Faster R-CNN

    Hu Z.H., Wang C.F.. A small object detection algorithm of remote sensing image based on improved Faster R-CNN. Computer Engineering and Science, 2024, 46 (6): 1063-1071

    2024

  26. [34]

    Research on defect detection method of nonwoven fabric mask based on machine vision

    Huang Jingde, Huang Zhangyu, Zhan Xin. Research on defect detection method of nonwoven fabric mask based on machine vision. International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Articial Intelligence, 2023, 37 (8): 2355008

    2023

  27. [35]

    https://blog.csdn.net/weixin_45617323/article/details/111596745

  28. [36]

    Quality evaluation of Keemun black tea by fusing data obtained from near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy and computer vision sensors

    Song Yan, Wang Xiaozhong, Xie Hanlei, Li Luqing, Ning Jingming, Zhang Zhengzhul. Quality evaluation of Keemun black tea by fusing data obtained from near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy and computer vision sensors. Spectrochimica Acta Part A-Molecular and Biomolecular Spectr...

    2021

  29. [37]

    External defect detection of transformer substation equipment based on improved Faster R- CNN

    Zhang M., Xing F, Liu D.. External defect detection of transformer substation equipment based on improved Faster R- CNN. CAAI Transactions on Intelligent Systems, 2024, 19 (2): 290-298

    2024

  30. [38]

    H. Yang, Y. Wang, J. Hu, J. He, Z. Yao and Q. Bi. Deep learning and machine vision-based inspection of rail surface defects. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 2022, 71: 1-14

    2022

  31. [39]

    Research on extracting regions of interest in images

    Zhao Zhixiang, Bai Wanmin, Liu Bailin. Research on extracting regions of interest in images. Information Systems Engineering, 2017,11: 156

    2017

  32. [40]

    Yolov4-mn3 for pcb surface defect detection

    Liao X, Lv S, Li D, et al. Yolov4-mn3 for pcb surface defect detection. Applied Sciences, 2021, 11 (24): 11701

    2021

  33. [41]

    Zhang, X

    H. Zhang, X. Jin, Q. M. J. Wu, Y. Wang Z. He and Y. Yang. Automatic visual detection system of railway surface defects with curvature filter and improved Gaussian mixture model. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., 2018, 67(7): 1593-1608

    2018

  34. [42]

    Research on chip pin recognition and center positioning algorithm based on machine vision

    Huang Ziqing, Zeng Xiangjin. Research on chip pin recognition and center positioning algorithm based on machine vision. Software guide, 2015,14 (1): 67-69

    2015

  35. [43]

    https://github.com/tangsanli5201/DeepPCB

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.