AgenticInspect: Risk-Aware Segmentation Refinement with Hybrid Auditing for Electronic Interconnection Inspection in Smart Manufacturing
Open accessAbstract
Industrial visual inspection requires not only accurate segmentation but also reliable and traceable decision making, since incorrect automatic refinements may lead to downstream manufacturing failures. Although segmentation foundation models achieve strong segmentation accuracy, they provide limited support for assessing whether refinement actions should be accepted, rejected, or escalated before deployment. To address this challenge, we propose AgenticInspect, a hybrid-audited agentic inspection framework that reformulates segmentation refinement as an action-level, risk-aware decision process. AgenticInspect treats an edge-deployable segmentation model as a replaceable skill. Based on the output of the segmentation skill, AgenticInspect introduces three task-specific decision modules, including uncertainty- and geometry-guided candidate generation, train-learned gating for high-risk refinement actions, and hybrid audit for risk-controlled mask selection. The hybrid audit layer integrates deterministic safety rules, train-learned safety gates, and selective large language model (LLM) review. The proposed framework provides action-level risk control and auditable decision making, with a traceable rationale for accepting, rejecting, or escalating candidate refinements. AgenticInspect was evaluated on a labeled connector-inspection dataset. The proposed refinement pipeline improved IoU from 0.9189303 to 0.9190180. The full hybrid policy reduced degraded refinements from 14 to 12 while maintaining nearly all performance gains (IoU = 0.9190131). Audit-component ablation attributes the observed reduction in IoU-degrading outputs to the train-learned risk veto, while LLM review serves as a selective, structured, and auditable assistive interface rather than an independently validated source of automatic improvement. These results position AgenticInspect as a risk-aware inspection framework that converts static segmentation outputs into auditable refinement decisions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
No citation lists for this paper
- Authors
- Lin, Y., Jiang, Y.-S., Ji, D.-Y., Wang, R., & Lee, J.
- Affiliations
- Foxconn (Taiwan) (TW)
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- Venue
- Electronics
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2026-10-16
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 4767
- ISSN
- 2079-9292 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W7222527684
- Semantic Scholar
- 4faf9901641cfb11102c32d8a3edd0d21a2283b0
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Electronics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Industrial AI center of University of Maryland College Park (2-957942)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
- Keywords
- segmentation refinement, risk-aware decision making, smart manufacturing
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