Cited by 48Industrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionMachine Learning and ELMNon-Destructive Testing Techniques

An Algorithm for Surface Defect Identification of Steel Plates Based on Genetic Algorithm and Extreme Learning Machine

Open access
Tian, Siyang, Xu, Ke·2017·Metals

Abstract

Defects on the surface of steel plates are one of the most important factors affecting the quality of steel plates. It is of great importance to detect such defects through online surface inspection systems, whose ability of defect identification comes from self-learning through training samples. Extreme Learning Machine (ELM) is a fast machine learning algorithm with a high accuracy of identification. ELM is implemented by a hidden matrix generated with random initialization parameters, while different parameters usually result in different performances. To solve this problem, an improved ELM algorithm combined with a Genetic Algorithm was proposed and applied for the surface defect identification of hot rolled steel plates. The output matrix of the ELM’s hidden layers was treated as a chromosome, and some novel iteration rules were added. The algorithm was tested with 1675 samples of hot rolled steel plates, including pockmarks, chaps, scars, longitudinal cracks, longitudinal scratches, scales, transverse cracks, transverse scratches, and roll marks. The results showed that the highest identification accuracies for the training and the testing set obtained by the G-ELM (Genetic Extreme Learning Machine) algorithm were 98.46% and 94.30%, respectively, which were about 5% higher than those obtained by the ELM algorithm.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/met7080311

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Xu, K.; Xu, J.W.; Chen, Y.L. On-line Inspection System for Surface Defects of Cold Rolled Strip. J. Univ. Sci. Technol. Beijing 2002, 24, 329-332.
  2. Qin, D.G.; Xu, K. Study on the On-line Detection Technology of Continuous Casting Slab Surface "Trajectory". Met. World 2010, 5, 13-16.
  3. Ai, Y.H.; Xu, K. Development and Prospect of Online Detection Technology for Steel Plate Surface. Met. World 2010, 5, 37-39.
  4. Jouetetal, J. Defect Classification in surface inspection of strip steel. Steel Times 1992, 16, 214-216.
  5. Canella, G.; Falessi, R. Surface inspection and classification plant for stainless steel strip. Nondestruct. Test. 1992, 72, 1185-1189.
  6. Badger, J.C.; Enright, S.T. Automated surface inspection system. Iron Steel Eng. 1996, 73, 48-51.
  7. Rodrick, T.J. Software controlled on-line su-rface inspection. Steel Times Int. 1998, 22, 30.
  8. Carisetti, C.A.; Fong, T.Y.; Fromm, C. Selflearning defect classifier. Iron Steel Eng. 1998, 75, 50-53.
  9. Parsytec Computer Corp. Software controlled on 2 line surface inspection. Steel Times Int. 1998, 22, 30.
  10. Ceracki, P.; Reizig, H.J.; Rudolphi, U.; Lucking, F. On-line surface inspection of hot-rolled strip. Metall. Plant Technol. Int. 2000, 23, 66-68.
  11. Bailleul, M. Dynamic surface inspection at the hot-strip mill. Steel Times Int. 2005, 29, 24.
  12. Li, S.X.; Huang, Z.H. Research on the detection method of glass mouth defect based on extreme learning machine. J. Computing Technol. Autom. 2016, 4, 117-120.
  13. Xu, K.; Zhou, P.; Yang, C.L. Online Detection Technology of Surface Defects in Continuous Casting Slab and Its Application. In Proceedings of the Scientific and Technological Progress and Fine Arts Symposium on Continuous Casting Equipment Technology, Xi'an, China, May 2013; pp. 1195-1200.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tian, S., & Xu, K.
Affiliations
University of Science and Technology Beijing (CN)
Corresponding author
Xu, Ke
ORCID
Xu, Ke
Venue
Metals
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2017-08-15
Volume
7
Issue
8
Pages
311
ISSN
2075-4701 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2749372762
Cited by
48
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4
FWCI
5.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Metals (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
The National Natural Science Foundation of China (51674031)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and ELM
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Non-Destructive Testing Techniques
Keywords
steel plate, hot-rolled steel, extreme learning machine, genetic algorithm, pockmarks, longitudinal cracks, defect classification

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