Multistage GAN for Fabric Defect Detection
Abstract
Fabric defect detection is an intriguing but challenging topic. Many methods have been proposed for fabric defect detection, but these methods are still suboptimal due to the complex diversity of both fabric textures and defects. In this paper, we propose a generative adversarial network (GAN)-based framework for fabric defect detection. Considering existing challenges in real-world applications, the proposed fabric defect detection system is capable of learning existing fabric defect samples and automatically adapting to different fabric textures during different application periods. Specifically, we customize a deep semantic segmentation network for fabric defect detection that can detect different defect types. Furthermore, we attempted to train a multistage GAN to synthesize reasonable defects in new defect-free samples. First, a texture-conditioned GAN is trained to explore the conditional distribution of defects given different texture backgrounds. Given a novel fabric, we aim to generate reasonable defective patches. Then, a GAN-based fusion network fuses the generated defects to specific locations. Finally, the well-trained multistage GAN continuously updates the existing fabric defect datasets and contributes to the fine-tuning of the semantic segmentation network to better detect defects under different conditions. Comprehensive experiments on various representative fabric samples are conducted to verify the detection performance of our proposed method.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some supervised methods use limited abnormal samples to synthesize more abnormal samples for training.
“In addition, some supervised methods use limited abnormal samples to synthesize more abnormal samples for training.”
From Deep Industrial Image Anomaly Detection: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as [154]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 247
- Authors
- Liu, J., Wang, C., Su, H., Du, B., & Tao, D.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- South China Normal University (CN)
- Wuhan University (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
- Published
- 2020
- Volume
- 29
- Pages
- 3388-3400
- ISSN
- 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0042
- OpenAlex
- W2994817145
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 30 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 11
- FWCI
- 14.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (61601335, 61822113, 41871243)
- National Key R&D of China (2018YFA060550)
- Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province (2018CFA050)
- Science and Technology Major Project of Hubei Province (2019AEA170)
- Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2017A030310437)
- Special Project on Industrial Technology Innovation of Suzhou (SYG201714)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
- Keywords
- fabric defect detection, generative adversarial networks, semantic segmentation, data augmentation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review