Cited by 452Industrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 217 of the 220 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Visual-Based Defect Detection and Classification Approaches for Industrial Applications—A SURVEY

Open access

Abstract

This paper reviews automated visual-based defect detection approaches applicable to various materials, such as metals, ceramics and textiles. In the first part of the paper, we present a general taxonomy of the different defects that fall in two classes: visible (e.g., scratches, shape error, etc.) and palpable (e.g., crack, bump, etc.) defects. Then, we describe artificial visual processing techniques that are aimed at understanding of the captured scenery in a mathematical/logical way. We continue with a survey of textural defect detection based on statistical, structural and other approaches. Finally, we report the state of the art for approaching the detection and classification of defects through supervised and non-supervised classifiers and deep learning.

Overview

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/s20051459

Cites

217 of 218 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 220 references

2 of the 220 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Monadjemi, 2004, Non-Destructive Testing, Insight –Non-Destr. Test. Cond. Monit., 46, 573
  2. Lopez, F., Acebron, F., Valiente, J., and Perez, E. (2001, January 16–18). A study of registration methods for ceramic tile inspection purposes. Proceedings of the IX Spanish Symposium on Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis, Benicasim, Spain.
  3. Ade, F., Lins, N., and Unser, M. (August, January 30). Comparison of various filter sets for defect detection in textiles. Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Montreal, QC, Canada.
  4. D’Astous, F., and Jernigan, M. (August, January 30). Texture discrimination based on detailed measures of the power spectrum. Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Montreal, QC, Canada.
  5. Campbell, J.G., Hashim, A.A., McGinnity, T.M., and Lunney, T.F. (1995, January 11–13). Flaw detection in woven textiles by neural network. Proceedings of the 5th Irish Neural Networks Conference, Maynooth, Ireland.
  6. Escofet, 2003, Wavelet based techniques for textile inspection, Opt. Eng, 26, 838
  7. Pietikäinen, M., Mäenpää, T., and Viertola, J. (2002, January 7–13). Color texture classification with color histograms and local binary patterns. Proceedings of the Workshop on Texture Analysis in Machine Vision, Florence, Italy.
  8. Matheron, G., and Serra, J. (2002, January 3–5). The birth of mathematical morphology. Proceedings of the 6th International Symp. Mathematical Morphology, Sydney, Australia.
  9. Tural, 2019, Automated Defect Detection on Surface of Militarz Cartridges, J. Mod. Technol. Eng., 4, 178
  10. Yang, 2016, Realistic simulation of camera images of micro-scale defects for automated defect inspection, Forum Bildverarbeitung 2016, Volume 84, 63

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 452

Metadata

Authors
Czimmermann, T., Ciuti, G., Milazzo, M., Chiurazzi, M., Roccella, S., Oddo, C. M., & Dario, P.
Affiliations
Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna (IT)
Corresponding author
  • Czimmermann, Tamás
  • Oddo, Calogero Maria
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-03-06
Volume
20
Issue
5
Pages
1459
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3009635072
Cited by
441
References
220
Citations by year
2026: 74 · 2025: 81 · 2024: 82 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 18
FWCI
4.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Regione Toscana (CENTAURO project (CUP D88C15000210008))
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Non-Destructive Testing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Keywords
visual defect detection, defect classification, industrial inspection, metal defects, ceramic defects, fabric defects, texture analysis, statistical texture analysis, supervised classifiers, deep learning

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