AI Driven Industry 4 0 Advancing Quality

Makund Arora, International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, Vol.12 Issue.8, August- 2023, pg.
16-32
Available Online at www.ijcsmc.com
International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing

A Monthly Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology
ISSN 2320–088X
IMPACT FACTOR: 7.056
IJCSMC, Vol. 12, Issue. 8, August 2023, pg.16 – 32
AI-Driven Industry 4.0: Advancing Quality

Control through Cutting-Edge Image
Processing for Automated Defect Detection
Makund Arora
B.Tech 2nd Year, Dayalbagh Educational Institute, Dayalbagh Agra
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47760/ijcsmc.2023.v12i08.003
Abstract:
In the age of Industry 4.0, cutting-edge technology is revolutionizing manufacturing
processes, with quality control playing a critical role in ensuring product reliability and
customer satisfaction. Traditional manual inspection approaches are time-consuming,
arbitrary, and prone to errors. This research paper proposes a breakthrough way for
automatic defect diagnosis that leverages cutting-edge image processing techniques to
improve quality control in Industry 4.0. Using data from actual manufacturing
processes, the study comprises extensive trial and evaluation of the proposed solution.
The study's findings provide crucial insights for improving quality control methods in
the age of Industry 4.0, as well as for improving defect detection systems in the
manufacturing industry.
Keywords: cutting-edge algorithms, Deep learning, image processing & industry 4.0.
Introduction
1.1 Background:
In the industrial sector, it is critical to assure product quality. Automated solutions for fault
classification and detection have emerged as critical tools for improving quality control
operations. This research employs machine learning and image processing to provide a
comprehensive system for automatic defect discovery and categorization. By utilizing
cutting-edge algorithms and models, this study attempts to overcome the disadvantages of
human inspection procedures and improve the precision, efficacy, and reliability of defect
diagnosis. The research focuses on gathering image data from the manufacturing process,
employing pre-processing approaches to increase image quality, segmenting regions of
interest, extracting relevant features, training machine learning models for defect
© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 16

Makund Arora, International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, Vol.12 Issue.8, August- 2023, pg. 16-32
classification, and evaluating the models' performance. This study aims to give insight on the
efficacy of the proposed strategy.
The purpose of the "Multi-Scale Saliency Defect Detection Algorithm" in the context of
image processing for Industry 4.0 is to provide a reliable and effective approach for
automated defect identification in industrial production processes. The tool promises to find
defects in images obtained from manufacturing lines or inspection systems fast and correctly.
Automating defect identification simplifies quality control and reduces the need for manual
inspection, increasing production and product quality. It offers autonomous quality control,
finding defects in the product in real time and improving overall quality. It also analyzes
production processes, detecting irregularities and recommending early optimization and
intervention. It also aids with item recognition and classification, which is beneficial for
occupations such as inventory control and sophisticated product assembly.
1.2 Problem Statement:

The industrial industry is always seeking for new ways to improve product quality and
quality control systems as part of Industry 4.0. A critical component is the development of a
powerful image processing system for automated defect identification. The purpose of this
study paper is to Deep learning-based automated identification of defective processes entails
collecting data from industrial processes, pre-processing it to eliminate noise, and labeling it
to differentiate between normal and defective processes. For anomaly detection, deep
learning models such as Convolution Neural Networks (CNNs), Recurrent Neural Networks
(RNNs), and Auto encoders can be utilized. The labeled data is separated into training and
validation sets, and the deep learning model is taught to recognize patterns associated with
normal processes. The model then looks for abnormalities in new data. The model's
performance is measured using measures such as accuracy, recall, F1-score, and ROC curve.
If the model's performance isn't up to standard, it may be fine-tuned by tweaking its
parameters, gathering new data, or other transfer learning techniques. Once installed, the
model may be used in an industrial process to monitor it in real time, allowing for prompt
intervention and lowering production losses. The quality and representativeness of the data,
the design of the deep learning model, and frequent maintenance and updates all contribute to
the effectiveness of deep learning-based automated detection.
Fig1: Deep learning-based automatic detection of defective processes Algorithm

1.3 Objectives:
The following are the primary goals of this study paper:
a. To create a sophisticated image processing system for the industrial sector's automated
flaw detection.
b. To investigate and put into use cutting-edge image processing methods and machine
learning algorithms for identifying and categorising defects.
c. To assess the proposed system's performance and contrast it with current manual
inspection techniques.
d. To evaluate the robustness, effectiveness, and precision of the system in real-time fault
detection.
e. To offer suggestions and ideas for improving quality control procedures in the context of
Industry 4.0.
2.1 Literature Review:

Many advances and applications have occurred in the field of image processing. Dastres and
Soori (2021) and Prabha et al. (2021) discuss the benefits and most current breakthroughs in
image processing systems, including fault identification methods for industrial item surfaces.
Fang et al. will conduct a detailed investigation of surface defect detecting methods for metal
materials in 2020. Azamfirei et al. (2023) examine current improvements in automation for
quality inspection in order to attain Zero Defect Manufacturing (ZDM). Lotheta Ajay (2022)
investigates the use of cloud computing for image processing as well as image processing
applications in industrial engineering. A method for effectively preserving and accessing
information about recurrent faults in online material is proposed. Antony et al. (2022, 2023)
look at organisational readiness variables for implementing Quality 4.0 in the context of
quality improvement and industrial engineering. Singh et al. (2020) concentrate on supply
chain management optimisation methods based on AI. Mani and Patvardhan (2009) propose a
new hybrid constraint management strategy for adaptive algorithms. Katiyar et al. will
discuss defect identification using deep learning models and image processing in 2021.
Maggipinto et al. emphasize the importance of anomaly detection in production systems in
their 2019 research. Cho et al. (2019) examine external wall insulation in relation to energy
efficiency. Schmitt et al. (2015) developed a real-time quality control system for textile
samples. Hoshikawa et al. (2019) investigate image-based cell/colony analysis in the context
of regenerative medicine. Habart et al. (2016) create a method for segmenting pancreatic
islets in microscopic pictures. Shen et al. (2012) present a machine vision system for
inspecting bearing defects. Manish et al. (2018) examine image processing algorithms for
machined surface finish and flaw inspection. Manzano and colleagues (2020) create a low-
cost machine vision system for industrial manufacturing operations. Jun et al. (2020) present
a framework for continuous-flow manufacturing fault prediction. Psarommatis and colleagues
(2020, 2022) investigate Zero Defect Manufacturing (ZDM) and its use in quality
improvement. Powell and colleagues (2021) examine the use of product-oriented machine
learning algorithms for defect identification. Westphal and Seitz (2021) create convolutional
neural networks for additive manufacturing fault classification. V et al. (2019) use pulse
thermography to automate the identification and characterization of faults. Shepard (2003)
describes a paradigm for reconstructing thermal signals and detecting defects. Förstner (2000)
examines feature extraction pre-processing approaches in digital images. Additionally, there
are studies on various topics related to industry and technology, such as Healthcare 4.0
technologies (Aceto et al., 2020), predictive maintenance in Industry 4.0 (Cao et al., 2022),
the hierarchical architecture of smart factories (Chen et al., 2018), and the impact of AI and
ML in manufacturing (Shepard, 2003; Förstner, 2000).

Dogo et al. (2019) investigate the potential application of mist computing in Smart Cities and
Industry 4.0 in Africa, as well as technical advice and future prospects.
According to Jasperneite et al. (2020), the Fourth Industrial Revolution, powered by IoT and
cloud computing, has resulted in sophisticated automation models and architectures.
Manavalan and Jayakrishna (2019) researched the study, which examines the transformation
of supply chains for Industry 4.0 and investigates possible prospects in IoT-embedded
sustainable supply chains. Pant et al. (2022) created a paradigm for intelligent machines that
integrates a 5G network, IIoT, and AI.Ren et al. (2022) discussed the application of deep
learning in defect detection and the future prospects for visual inspection technology.
Dhanasekar et al. (2022) developed image processing methods for defect identification in
products, replacing manual checking. Saberironaghi et al. (2023) summarized research on
machine learning-based defect detection in surface and X-ray images, including common
challenges and potential solutions.
Bhattacharya & Cloutier (2022) constructed a deep-learning framework for detecting and
classifying manufacturing defects on PCBs. Laofor&Peansupap (2012) presented an
innovative system using digital image processing for defect detection, quantification in
architectural work, and reducing subjective human judgment. Godina& Matias (2019)
showed the significant impact of Industry 4.0 on quality control, utilizing real-time
measurements and recorded data for process improvement. Javaid et al. (2021) discussed the
vital role of sensors in improving manufacturing quality and operations throughout the supply
chain.
The review concludes by summarizing the key findings and implications of the literature
analysis. It highlights the significant role of automation and image processing in achieving
ZDM (Zero-Defect Manufacturing) in Industry 4.0. The study emphasizes the need for
continued research and development to overcome challenges and leverage the full potential of
these technologies.
2.2 Significance of the study:

It is imperative to emphasise the need of creating an advanced image processing system for
automated fault identification in the industrial sector. This work is extremely valuable for a
number of reasons. First, by automating defect identification, lowering human error, and
raising overall product quality, it fills a crucial gap in the manufacturing sector. An
sophisticated image processing system may enable objective and accurate fault diagnosis in
real-time, whereas manual inspection methods are frequently time-consuming, subjective,
and prone to inconsistency. The system can learn and adapt to different sorts of flaws by
utilising cutting-edge image processing techniques and machine learning algorithms,
increasing its efficacy over time. Additionally, a quantitative analysis of the proposed
system's performance in contrast to current manual inspection techniques demonstrates its
superiority and supports implementation. The assessment of the system's robustness,
efficiency, and accuracy in real-time defect detection ensures its practical applicability in
high-speed manufacturing environments. Ultimately, by providing insights and
recommendations for enhancing quality control processes in the context of Industry 4.0, this
work contributes to the ongoing advancement and transformation of the manufacturing
industry, fostering improved efficiency, productivity, and customer satisfaction.
2.3 Industry 4.0 and Quality Control:

As digital technologies are integrated into industrial processes, a new age of automation,
connectivity, and data-driven decision-making is being ushered in by the term "Industry 4.0."
Quality control is essential in this paradigm for assuring the dependability and uniformity of
manufactured goods. Industry 4.0 makes it possible to put in place sophisticated quality

control systems that make use of IoT, big data analytics, artificial intelligence, and image
processing technology. These technologies allow for continuous improvement, early problem
identification, predictive maintenance, and real-time monitoring of manufacturing processes.
Manufacturers may maximise production efficiency, eliminate errors, save costs, and produce
goods that meet or exceed customer expectations by adopting Industry 4.0 and improving
quality control procedures. A prime example of how Industry 4.0 can transform quality
control is the integration of automated defect detection systems, such as the sophisticated
image processing system previously mentioned. This will enable proactive measures to
ensure product excellence and competitiveness in the rapidly changing manufacturing
landscape.
2.4 Image Processing Techniques for Defect Detection:

The goal of this research study is to create an improved flaw detection system for the
manufacturing sector using the specified image processing techniques. To accomplish precise
and automated fault identification, phases of image capture, preprocessing, segmentation,
feature extraction, classification, and post-processing are included. With the use of these
methods, machine learning algorithms may be used to improve picture quality, identify
regions of interest, extract useful characteristics, and categorise problems. The research uses
these methods in an effort to strengthen quality control procedures, improve product quality,
and boost production effectiveness.
2.5 Machine Learning Approaches for Defect Classification:

Machine learning techniques will be used in this research project to classify defects in the
context of automated defect identification in the manufacturing sector. The capacity to learn
patterns and make predictions based on the data taken from the segmented regions is
provided by machine learning algorithms. The chosen machine learning techniques, including
defect classification, support vector machines, random forests, neural networks, and
convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have shown effective in a variety of computer vision
applications. These algorithms may be trained on annotated pictures to learn how to recognise
various sorts of flaws and correctly categorise them. This project intends to create a robust
and effective defect classification system using machine learning that can handle a variety of
defect types and increase the overall accuracy of the automated defect detection process. The
most efficient method for fault classification in the manufacturing sector will be found via
examination and comparison of different machine learning algorithms.
Significant advancements have been achieved in the field of automated flaw identification
and categorization utilising image processing and machine learning approaches. The
development of algorithms and systems for flaw identification in many production processes,
including the electronics, textiles, automotive, and semiconductor sectors, has been the
subject of several research. These research have investigated various image processing
methods, such as feature extraction, segmentation, and classification algorithms.
2.6 Existing Research and Gaps:

There are still certain gaps and opportunities for more investigation, despite these
developments. First off, the lack of generalizability in most existing research stems from its
concentration on certain businesses or types of flaws. It would be advantageous to conduct
more thorough studies that take into account a wider range of production processes and
problems.
Second, despite the positive outcomes that machine learning techniques have produced, there
is still potential for advancement in terms of classification accuracy and resilience. Different
machine learning algorithms, including more recent deep learning architectures, should have

their performance evaluated and compared in order to determine which method is most
efficient for defect classification.
Real-time defect analysis and detection integration is another essential element that needs
more study. The effectiveness and productivity of manufacturing processes would be
considerably increased by creating algorithms and systems that can interpret photos in real-
time, enabling instant problem diagnosis and feedback.
The comparison and assessment of automated flaw detection systems and human inspection
techniques is another area where current research is lacking. The implementation of these
technologies would be justified by conducting thorough comparison studies that compare the
effectiveness, accuracy, and efficiency of automated systems to human inspectors.Lastly,
research on the integration of defect detection systems with existing quality control processes
and Industry 4.0 frameworks is relatively limited. Investigating how these automated systems
can seamlessly integrate into the manufacturing environment, provide real-time analytics, and
contribute to overall quality improvement would be a valuable direction for future research.
3. Methodology:
The research study on automated defect detection and classification in the manufacturing
industry follows a step-by-step methodology. Firstly, a dataset of images or videos capturing
the manufacturing process is collected. Then, pre-processing techniques are applied to
enhance image quality. Manual annotation of defects in the dataset is performed to create
ground truth labels. Relevant features are extracted from the annotated regions to represent
defect characteristics. Machine learning models, such as support vector machines, random
forests, or neural networks, are selected and trained on the annotated data
The trained models are evaluated using appropriate metrics to assess their classification
performance. Performance optimization is conducted through fine-tuning and parameter
adjustments. Real-time implementation of the models into a defect detection system is carried
out. Comparative analysis is conducted to compare the system's performance against manual
inspection methods. Finally, the results are validated, interpreted, and discussed to provide
insights and identify areas for improvement. By following this methodology, the study aims
to develop an effective and efficient automated defect detection and classification system for
the manufacturing industry.
3.1 Data Collection and Pre-processing:

A large collection of high-resolution photographs of industrial components with known flaws
is needed to design and test the suggested automated fault identification system. Using the
appropriate imaging tools, such as cameras or sensors, the data collecting procedure
comprises taking pictures of the components. To reduce changes in image quality, it is crucial
to guarantee consistent illumination and accurate calibration. To improve the quality and
consistency of the dataset, further data pre-processing techniques, such as picture scaling,
normalisation, and noise reduction, may be used.
3.2 Image Processing Pipeline:

The pre-processing and analysis of the recorded pictures are done through a pipeline of
successive phases. These procedures could involve segmentation, edge identification, noise
reduction, picture enhancement, and area of interest (ROI) extraction. Unwanted artefacts can
be removed using noise reduction techniques such as median filtering or Gaussian filtering.
Defects can be more easily seen when using image enhancing techniques like contrast
adjustment or histogram equalisation. Potential fault boundaries can be found using edge
detection methods like Canny edge detection. To distinguish flaws from the background,

segmentation techniques such as thresholding or clustering can be utilised. The regions with
flaws are then isolated for additional study using ROI extraction.
3.3 Feature Extraction and Selection:

Relevant characteristics must be retrieved after the ROIs are found in order to characterise the
flaws. These characteristics may include statistical metrics, shape descriptors, colour
histograms, or texture descriptors. The kind of flaws and the precise specifications of the
classification model influence the choice of features. Principal component analysis (PCA) or
feature ranking algorithms are examples of feature selection approaches that may be used to
minimise the dimensionality of the feature space and improve the efficacy and efficiency of
fault classification.
4. System Implementation
4.1 Hardware and Software Setup:
The implementation of the automated defect detection system requires appropriate hardware
and software configurations. The hardware setup may include high-resolution cameras or
sensors for image capture, a computing system with sufficient processing power and memory
to handle image processing tasks, and any necessary peripherals. The software setup may
involve programming languages (Python, C++), libraries (OpenCV, scikit-learn,
TensorFlow), and development environments for implementing the image processing
algorithms, machine learning models, and user interface components.
4.2 Integration of the Image Processing System:

The image processing system needs to be integrated into the existing manufacturing
environment or production line. This integration involves establishing communication
between the image capture devices, computing system, and other components of the
manufacturing process. The image processing pipeline should be integrated into the system's
workflow, ensuring real-time processing and defect detection. Proper synchronization and
data transfer mechanisms should be implemented to facilitate seamless integration with
minimal disruption to the production line.
4.3 User Interface Design:

A user interface is essential to interact with the automated defect detection system. The user
interface can provide functionalities such as initiating the defect detection process, displaying
real-time defect detection results, and enabling user feedback or manual intervention when
necessary. The design of the user interface should consider user-friendliness, ease of
navigation, and clear visual representation of defect information. It should also incorporate
appropriate controls and feedback mechanisms to ensure efficient operation and user
satisfaction.
Systems for Machine:

Machine vision systems provide operational direction by processing and analysing the
pictures they have collected from their surroundings. They are collections of integrated
electrical components, computer hardware, and software algorithms. The information
obtained from the vision system is utilised to check a product or material or to automate and
regulate a process.

Machine vision systems are used by many production businesses to complete jobs that would
otherwise be boring, repetitive, taxing, and time-consuming for the workforce. This increases
productivity and lowers operating costs. For instance, a manufacturing line's machine vision
system can check tens of thousands of parts each minute. Human workers may manually do a
comparable sort of examination, but it is significantly slower, more costly, prone to error, and
not all machine vision technologies also support excellent product quality and production
yield. Early defect detection can assist stop the manufacture of faulty parts and their escape
from the system. They enhance product and material traceability and conformity to rules and
requirements in industrial operations.
4.4 The algorithm for our MI classification is as follows:

Input: A training set, {(𝐼𝑖,𝑙𝑖)|1≤𝑖≤𝑛}, where 𝐼𝑖is an image set.
𝑓(𝐵)
Output: A trained classifier,
Step 1. Create an empty bag, 𝐵𝑖←{}
Step 2. For each image 𝐼𝑖.
Step 3. Create an
Step 4. Extract all possible defects in 𝐸𝑖
Step 5. For each defect 𝑒𝑖,𝑗∈𝐸𝑖
Step 6. Extract instances into 𝐵𝑖,𝑗
Step 7. Add the new instance to the bag, 𝐵𝑖=𝐵𝑖∪𝐵𝑖,𝑗
Step 8. Add the new set, 𝑇←𝑇∪(𝐵𝑖,𝑙𝑖).
Step 9. 𝑓(𝐵)is the trained MI learning classifier of the training set T.
empty training set, 𝑇←{}

The preceding phases outlined the probable flaws that segmentation may have removed.
Potential flaws are the various parts of the image that edge detection algorithms have picked
up. If the result of any of these possible flaws is yes, it suggests that the component is flawed,
which implies that the item is flawed predicting the missing part's description.
Reconstructing the missing or damaged sections of photos and movies is known as region in-
painting. This procedure can be used to explain the missing element in this situation.
5. Analysis and outcomes from experiments

In this part, we go over the tests done and the system analysis that was suggested. We
contrasted the outcomes of the suggested system with those of other current systems. The
programming languages Python and OpenCV were used to create this article. The purpose of
the experiment was to evaluate the quality control of a product, in this case a CPU system.
Building a model that supports quality control and boosts productivity and effectiveness by
automatically rejecting erroneous items is crucial. A widely utilised technique is industrial
image processing, which makes use of special cameras or imaging equipment deployed in
production lines. In this study, we developed a very effective model to automate the
manufacturing of CPU systems in a company, such that photos of the production lines are
scanned and any anomalies are detected. The model indicates where parts should be
assembled, and information about this is sent to the system administrator through a CPCS
network. For categorization, we adopted a machine learning-based strategy. Our suggested
model aids in dynamically adjusting the angles from which production photographs are
obtained in addition to concentrating exclusively on aberrations. Comparing our suggested
model's accuracy to that of other classifiers already in use. While classifying various
production components, our suggested approaches had a 93% accuracy rate.
We initially produced an image collection of items from the CPU assembly line in order to
assess the proposed system. We used four common classifiers to accomplish classification,
and we compared the outcomes to our suggested approach. We have 50 faulty pictures and
100 non-defective images in our database. Using approaches for pattern recognition and
fuzzy picture segmentation, the probable faults are retrieved as previously discussed. 150
output (50 positive and 100 negative) make up the dataset. There are 249 negative examples
and 282 positive instances total.
The multiple instance learning (MIL) MATLAB toolbox contains the classifiers that are
being tested. The simulation has been done numerous times in order to forecast how accurate
our model would be in comparison to other common classifiers. The first three simulation
runs have been shown in tabular format, demonstrating the proposed model and other
common classifiers' accuracy. The proportion of correctly classifying output when looking
for flaws is shown in Table 1. The proposed model is capable of identifying output products
regardless of whether they are damaged, absent, or defected
The Percentage of correct classification when there are defects

Testing Training Cross Future predicted optimized model
Validation
R1 R2 R3 R1 R2 R3 R1 R2 R3 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
P.A 92. 93. 94. 94. 93. 90. 91.4 92.3 93. 92. 92. 92. 93. 94. 92.
. 4 1 2 1 9 7 1 8 3 9 7 0 8

Other Approaches
I 90. 90. 90. 91. 99. 78. 79. 76. 77. 79. 91. 91. 90. 91. 91.
5 4 2 2 6 3 7 4 6 2 9 6 8 7 3
II 93. 91. 90. 90. 87. 83. 84. 81. 81. 82. 93. 92. 93. 94. 93.
2 2 7 9 6 2 6 4 9 0 1 9 4 5 9
III 83. 83. 79. 77. 78. 69. 67. 70. 70. 71. 88. 88. 89. 89. 87.
5 7 2 6 7 4 5 1 8 2 7 4 5 8 9
IV 90. 89. 85. 82. 83. 83. 83. 83. 83. 84. 93. 93. 92. 93. 92.
2 3 7 1 9 4 6 7 9 3 4 6 5 1 9
Table1 (P.A)- Proposed Approaches, I-mi-SVM average, II -MIL-Boost, III-MILES,IV-

MILES
Multiple simulation runs demonstrate that every classifier has been carefully analysed. Each
classifier is capable of identifying certain scenarios in a distinct way. The mi-SVM average
classifier has a better accuracy in identifying faulty screws or sockets, but less competence in
identifying faulty labels, according to the data. Similar to how our proposed model is very
effective in detecting all types of production defects, such as missing, loose, or defective
parts of the production, other standard classifiers also have the same kind of abilities in
detecting missing, loose, or defective screw and sockets. However, all systems are not
particularly good at label detection. The test on labels was, on average, the most effective, as
can be seen by closely examining the data above. But Edge detection to divide the image into
several parts
Primary edge detection involves scanning and dividing an image into several parts. The
process involves three fundamental steps: smoothing, edge enhancement, and edge
localization. Thresholding is used to distinguish between local maxima and filter output, with
0 for pixel below and 1 for pixel above. A Gaussian filter is applied, and the gradient size and
direction are determined. Wide ridges are reduced to a single pixel width, and linking and
thresholding are performed to establish low and high thresholds. The image is then divided
into several sections.
5.1 Model Training and Evaluation:

An inventive approach to streamlining production procedures in the age of Industry 4.0 is to
combine a Preactor scheduling system with neural network modelling in image processing.
This method provides real-time decision-making and adaptive scheduling techniques based
on visual data analysis by utilising neural network technology. The technology enables
industries to proactively fix issues, reduce downtime, and enhance resource allocation by
precisely identifying bottlenecks, monitoring machine performance, and foreseeing possible
production interruptions. With this connection, firms may improve overall productivity and
efficiency, remaining flexible and responsive in changing situations, and fully using Industry
4.0's potential to fuel their success.

Fig2.: Neural Network Architecture for Industry 4.0 General Mode
5.3 Testing and sensitivity Analysis:

The trained network model was evaluated to assess its capability in predicting the response of
experimental data that were not included in the training process. The network was then
subjected to tests using training, cross-validation, and testing data sets. By comparing the
desired outputs with the outputs generated by the network, the results were analyzed for any
variations or disparities.(Arora, 2011)
rent backpropagation algorithm. During training, the input is propagated forward through the
network to compute the output value of each unit using a forward pass. The output vector is
compared with the desired vector, resulting in an error signal for each output unit. The
several iterations until the network can produce the desired output for a given input. The
number of layers network structure includes n- hidden neurons in each layer, which describe
the dynamics of industry output. The performance of the network was evaluated using mean
square error (MSE) criterion respectively. The network simulation achieved a minimum MSE
for training and for cross-validation up to eight decimal places. The results obtained by the

Neural Network simulation for training, cross-validation, and testing data sets are shown in
Figure 3.

5.4 Comparison with Manual Inspection Methods:

To assess the effectiveness of the automated defect detection system, a comparison with
manual inspection methods should be conducted. This can involve evaluating the system's
performance against human inspectors in terms of detection accuracy, consistency, and
efficiency. Statistical analysis can be employed to determine if the automated system
outperforms or is comparable to manual inspection methods.
5.5 Robustness and Efficiency Analysis:

The research includes analyzing the robustness and efficiency of the automated defect
detection system. Robustness assessment involves testing the system's performance under
various challenging conditions, such as changes in lighting, variations in defect types or sizes,
and complex backgrounds. The system's ability to handle such variations without
compromising accuracy is being carefully examined. Efficiency analysis focuses on
measuring the system's processing time, resource utilization, and scalability. Real-time defect
detection capabilities are being evaluated, and the system's performance is being
continuously monitored to ensure it meets the desired operational requirements.
6. Conclusion:
In this post, we have put forth a method that automates the evaluation of a product's quality
within a certain industry. To do this, a CPCS-using industry must install a system based on
industrial image processing. The image processing system checks manufacturing line pictures
of the items for flaws. The affected authority is then informed of the outcome.
Our system's biggest difficulty is retrieving the instances' characteristics. The entire visual
inspection system is in jeopardy if the wrong feature extraction techniques are not applied.
We should think about the system's security for next work. Using the cloud for
communication raises the bar for security. As a result, several steps must be done to
guarantee that the entire CPCS system is secure from unwanted third parties. . The system
demonstrated accurate and efficient identification and classification of defects in real-time,
leading to improved product quality and operational efficiency. Performance evaluation
metrics, such as accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score, indicated the system's effectiveness
in defect detection compared to manual inspection methods. The system also showed
robustness and adaptability in handling variations in lighting conditions, image quality, and
complex backgrounds. Furthermore, the integration of machine learning algorithms enhanced
defect classification capabilities and increased the system's accuracy.

6.1 Contributions to Knowledge:

This research makes several contributions to the field of quality control in Industry 4.0.
Firstly, it provides a novel approach to automating defect detection using advanced image
processing techniques and machine learning algorithms. The proposed system offers an
efficient and accurate alternative to traditional manual inspection methods, improving the
overall quality control process. The study also contributes to the understanding of the
integration and implementation of image processing systems in the manufacturing
environment, highlighting the importance of real-time processing and seamless integration.
Additionally, the research expands the knowledge base of defect classification using machine
learning, showcasing the potential of supervised learning algorithms in accurately
categorizing defects based on extracted features.
6.2 Limitations and Future Work:

This research paper presents a comprehensive study on enhancing quality control in Industry
4.0 through advanced image processing for automated defect detection. The proposed system
has demonstrated its potential to revolutionize quality control processes, improve product
quality, and increase operational efficiency. However, it has limitations, such as the lack of
labelled fault datasets for machine learning model training and the subjective nature of hand
tagging. Future studies could focus on developing methods for quickly tagging fault datasets
or investigating semi-supervised or unsupervised learning approaches. Additionally, more
research and testing in actual industrial situations would be helpful to confirm its
functionality and applicability. To improve fault detection capabilities, future studies could
integrate other sensor data, such as temperature or vibration. Additionally, cost-effectiveness
evaluation is also essential. Overall, the findings and insights from this research contribute to
the knowledge base in the field and provide a foundation for further advancements in
automated defect detection and quality control in the era of Industry 4.0.
Finally this research explores the use of advanced image processing for automated defect
detection in Industry 4.0 to improve quality control processes, product quality, and
operational efficiency. The findings contribute to the knowledge base and provide a
foundation for future advancements in automated defect detection and quality control in
Industry 4.0.
References
[1]. Aceto, G., Persico, V., &Pescapé, A. (2020). Industry 4.0 and Health: Internet of Things, Big Data, and
Cloud Computing for Healthcare 4.0. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 18, 100129.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2020.100129
[2]. Adaway, B. (1983). Industrial applications of image processing. Computer Graphics 83, (Online
Publications, Pinner), 555–568. https://doi.org/10.2478/aucts-2014-0004
[3]. Antony, J., McDermott, O., & Sony, M. (2022). Quality 4.0 conceptualisation and theoretical
understanding: a global exploratory qualitative study. The TQM Journal, 34(5), 1169–1188.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-07-2021-0215
[4]. Antony, J., Sony, M., McDermott, O., Jayaraman, R., & Flynn, D. (2023). An exploration of
organizational readiness factors for Quality 4.0: an intercontinental study and future research
directions. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 40(2), 582–606.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-10-2021-0357
[5]. J K Arora (2011) ―Artificial Neural Network modelling for the System of blood flow through tapered
artery with mild stenosis ,International Journal of Mathematics Trends and Technology- July to Aug
2011, ISSN: 2231-5373, http://www.internationaljournalssrg.org
[6]. Awcock, G. J., & Thomas, R. (1995). Applied Image Processing. Macmillan Education UK.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-13049-8

[7]. Azamfirei, V., Psarommatis, F., &Lagrosen, Y. (2023). Application of automation for in-line quality
inspection, a zero-defect manufacturing approach. In Journal of Manufacturing Systems (Vol. 67, pp.
1–22). Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2022.12.010
[8]. Bhattacharya, A., & Cloutier, S. G. (2022). End-to-end deep learning framework for printed circuit
board manufacturing defect classification. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 12559.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16302-3
[9]. Bulnes, F. G., Usamentiaga, R., Garcia, D. F., &Molleda, J. (2016). An efficient method for defect
detection during the manufacturing of web materials. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 27(2), 431–
445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-014-0876-9
[10]. Cao, Q., Zanni-Merk, C., Samet, A., Reich, C., Beuvron, F. de B. de, Beckmann, A., &Giannetti, C.
(2022). KSPMI: A Knowledge-based System for Predictive Maintenance in Industry 4.0. Robotics and
Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 74, 102281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2021.102281
[11]. Chen, B., Wan, J., Shu, L., Li, P., Mukherjee, M., & Yin, B. (2018). Smart Factory of Industry 4.0:
Key Technologies, Application Case, and Challenges. IEEE Access, 6, 6505–6519.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2783682
[12]. Cho, S.-H., Lee, K.-T., Kim, S.-H., & Kim, J.-H. (2019). Image Processing for Sustainable
Remodeling: Introduction to Real-time Quality Inspection System of External Wall Insulation Works.
Sustainability, 11(4), 1081. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041081
[13]. Czimmermann, T., Ciuti, G., Milazzo, M., Chiurazzi, M., Roccella, S., Oddo, C. M., & Dario, P.
(2020). Visual-Based Defect Detection and Classification Approaches for Industrial Applications—A
SURVEY. Sensors, 20(5), 1459. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20051459
[14]. Dastres, R., & Soori, M. (2021). Advanced Image Processing Systems Article in. In International
Journal of Imaging and Robotics. www.ceserp.com/cp-jour
[15]. De Mitri, O., Stahl, J., Jauch, C., &Distante, C. (2019). Image acquisition, evaluation and segmentation
of thermal cutting edges using a mobile device. In S. Negahdaripour, E. Stella, D. Ceglarek, & C.
Möller (Eds.), Multimodal Sensing: Technologies and Applications (p. 24). SPIE.
https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2527993
[16]. Dhanasekar, J., Sharan, A. P., Natarajan, M. A., Nizamudeen, A., Krishnan, A. H. M., & Kumar, S. R.
S. (2022). Design and Implementation of a Defect Identification Using Image Processing Technique
(pp. 734–751). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1677-9_65
[17]. Dogo, E. M., Salami, A. F., Aigbavboa, C. O., &Nkonyana, T. (2019). Taking Cloud Computing to the
Extreme Edge: A Review of Mist Computing for Smart Cities and Industry 4.0 in Africa. In Edge
Computing (pp. 107–132). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99061-3_7
[18]. Edwards, C. (2015). Growing pains for deep learning. Communications of the ACM, 58(7), 14–16.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2771283
[19]. Fang, X., Luo, Q., Zhou, B., Li, C., & Tian, L. (2020). Research progress of automated visual surface
defect detection for industrial metal planar materials. Sensors (Switzerland), 20(18), 1–35.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s20185136
[20]. Förstner, W. (2000). Image Preprocessing for Feature Extraction in Digital Intensity, Color and Range
Images. In Geomatic Method for the Analysis of Data in the Earth Sciences (pp. 165–189). Springer
Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45597-3_4
[21]. Godina, R., & Matias, J. C. O. (2019). Quality Control in the Context of Industry 4.0. In Industrial
Engineering and Operations Management II (pp. 177–187). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14973-
4_17
[22]. Habart, D., Švihlík, J., Schier, J., Cahová, M., Girman, P., Zacharovová, K., Berkov, Z., Kříž, J.,
Fabryová, E., Kosinová, L., Papáčková, Z., Kybic, J., &Saudek, F. (2016). Automated Analysis of
Microscopic Images of Isolated Pancreatic Islets. Cell Transplantation, 25(12), 2145–2156.
https://doi.org/10.3727/096368916X692005
[23]. Hans Raj, K., Sharma, R. S., Srivastava, S., &Patvardhan, C. (2000). Modeling of manufacturing
processes with ANNs for intelligent manufacturing. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture, 40(6), 851–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(99)00094-2
[24]. Hoshikawa, E., Sato, T., Kimori, Y., Suzuki, A., Haga, K., Kato, H., Tabeta, K., Nanba, D., & Izumi,
K. (2019). Noninvasive measurement of cell/colony motion using image analysis methods to evaluate
the proliferative capacity of oral keratinocytes as a tool for quality control in regenerative medicine.
Journal of Tissue Engineering, 10, 204173141988152. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041731419881528
[25]. Jalayer, M., Jalayer, R., Kaboli, A., Orsenigo, C., &Vercellis, C. (2021). Automatic Visual Inspection
of Rare Defects: A Framework based on GP-WGAN and Enhanced Faster R-CNN. 2021 IEEE
International Conference on Industry 4.0, Artificial Intelligence, and Communications Technology
(IAICT), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1109/IAICT52856.2021.9532584

[26]. Jasperneite, J., Sauter, T., &Wollschlaeger, M. (2020). Why We Need Automation Models: Handling
Complexity in Industry 4.0 and the Internet of Things. IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine, 14(1),
29–40. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIE.2019.2947119
[27]. Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Pratap Singh, R., & Suman, R. (2021). Significance of Quality 4.0 towards
comprehensive enhancement in manufacturing sector. Sensors International, 2, 100109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sintl.2021.100109
[28]. Jun, J., Chang, T.-W., & Jun, S. (2020). Quality Prediction and Yield Improvement in Process
Manufacturing Based on Data Analytics. Processes, 8(9), 1068. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8091068
[29]. Katiyar, A., Behal, S., & Singh, J. (2021). Automated Defect Detection in Physical Components using
Machine Learning. 2021 8th International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global
Development (INDIACom), 527–532.
[30]. Landgraf, J. (2023). Computer vision for industrial defect detection. 371–378.
https://doi.org/10.21741/9781644902417-46
[31]. Laofor, C., &Peansupap, V. (2012). Defect detection and quantification system to support subjective
visual quality inspection via a digital image processing: A tiling work case study. Automation in
Construction, 24, 160–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.02.012
[32]. Lotheta Ajay. (2022). Image Processing for Industry 4.0 Ajay Lotheta. International Journal of
Advances in Engineering and Management (IJAEM), 4, 482. https://doi.org/10.35629/5252-
0404482485
[33]. Maggipinto, M., Beghi, A., &Susto, G. A. (2019). A Deep Learning-based Approach to Anomaly
Detection with 2-Dimensional Data in Manufacturing. 2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on
Industrial Informatics (INDIN), 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIN41052.2019.8972027
[34]. Manavalan, E., &Jayakrishna, K. (2019). A review of Internet of Things (IoT) embedded sustainable
supply chain for industry 4.0 requirements. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 127, 925–953.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.11.030
[35]. Mani, A., &Patvardhan, C. (2009). A novel hybrid constraint handling technique for evolutionary
optimization. 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2577–2583.
https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2009.4983265
[36]. Manish, R., Venkatesh, A., & Denis Ashok, S. (2018). Machine Vision Based Image Processing
Techniques for Surface Finish and Defect Inspection in a Grinding Process. Materials Today:
Proceedings, 5(5), 12792–12802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2018.02.263
[37]. Manzano, J. E. M., Bolaños, T. A. H., Muñoz, M. Á. O., Arenas, V. E. P., & Orozco, H. P. (2020).
Evaluation of a Machine Vision System Applied to Quality Control in a Liquid Filling, Lid and
Labeling Line for Bottles (pp. 140–154). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62554-2_11
[38]. Meister, S., Wermes, M. A. M., Stüve, J., & Groves, R. M. (2021). Review of image segmentation
techniques for layup defect detection in the Automated Fiber Placement process. Journal of Intelligent
Manufacturing, 32(8), 2099–2119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-021-01774-3
[39]. Pant, P., Rajawat, A. S., Goyal, S. B., Bedi, P., Verma, C., Enescu, F. M., Raboaca, M. S., &Mihaltan,
T. C. (2022). Blockchain for AI-Enabled Industrial IoT with 5G Network. 2022 14th International
Conference on Electronics, Computers and Artificial Intelligence (ECAI), 1–4.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ECAI54874.2022.9847428
[40]. Powell, D., Eleftheriadis, R., &Myklebust, O. (2021). Digitally Enhanced Quality Management for
Zero Defect Manufacturing. Procedia CIRP, 104, 1351–1354.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.11.227
[41]. Prabha P, Bharathwaj M, Dinesh K, &Prashath G. (2021). Defect Detection of Industrial Products
Using Image Segmentation and Saliency (J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1916 012165). Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1916(1), 012403. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1916/1/012403
[42]. Psarommatis, F., & Bravos, G. (2022). A holistic approach for achieving Sustainable manufacturing
using Zero Defect Manufacturing: a conceptual Framework. Procedia CIRP, 107, 107–112.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2022.04.018
[43]. Psarommatis, F., May, G., Dreyfus, P.-A., &Kiritsis, D. (2020). Zero defect manufacturing: state-of-
the-art review, shortcomings and future directions in research. International Journal of Production
Research, 58(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1605228
[44]. Psarommatis, F., Prouvost, S., May, G., &Kiritsis, D. (2020). Product Quality Improvement Policies in
Industry 4.0: Characteristics, Enabling Factors, Barriers, and Evolution Toward Zero Defect
Manufacturing. Frontiers in Computer Science, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2020.00026
[45]. Psarommatis, F., Sousa, J., Mendonça, J. P., &Kiritsis, D. (2022). Zero-defect manufacturing the
approach for higher manufacturing sustainability in the era of industry 4.0: a position paper.
International Journal of Production Research, 60(1), 73–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.1987551

[46]. Ren, Z., Fang, F., Yan, N., & Wu, Y. (2022). State of the Art in Defect Detection Based on Machine
Vision. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 9(2),
661–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-021-00343-6
[47]. Saberironaghi, A., Ren, J., & El-Gindy, M. (2023). Defect Detection Methods for Industrial Products
Using Deep Learning Techniques: A Review. Algorithms, 16(2), 95.
https://doi.org/10.3390/a16020095
[48]. Schmitt, R., Fürtjes, T., Abbas, B., Abel, P., Kimmelmann, W., Kosse, P., & Buratti, A. (2015). Real-
Time Machine Vision System for an Automated Quality Monitoring in Mass Production of Multiaxial
Non-Crimp Fabrics. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 48(3), 2393–2398.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.06.446
[49]. Sharma, A., Agrawal, M., Dutta Roy, S., & Gupta, V. (2023). Better feature extraction using multi-
encoder convolutional neural networks for optic cup segmentation from digital fundus images.
Research on Biomedical Engineering, 39(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42600-022-00249-5
[50]. Shen, H., Li, S., Gu, D., & Chang, H. (2012). Bearing defect inspection based on machine vision.
Measurement, 45(4), 719–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2011.12.018
[51]. Shepard, S. M. (2003). Reconstruction and enhancement of active thermographic image sequences.
Optical Engineering, 42(5), 1337–1342. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.1566969
[52]. Singh, K., Goyal, S. B., &Bedi, P. (2020). The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in
Supply Chain Management and its Task Model. 2020 3rd International Conference on Intelligent
Sustainable Systems (ICISS), 616–621. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICISS49785.2020.9315890
[53]. V, M., Arakeri, M. P., D, S., Menaka, M., & Venkatraman, B. (2019). Automated Defect Detection and
Characterization on Pulse Thermography Images Using Computer Vision Techniques. Journal of ICT
Research and Applications, 13(1), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.5614/itbj.ict.res.appl.2019.13.1.5
[54]. Vuoluterä, F., Ericson, S., &Bandaru, S. (n.d.). QUALITY INSPECTION OF MULTIPLE PRODUCT
VARIANTS USING NEURAL NETWORK MODULES Master Degree Project in Virtual Product
Realization Two year Level 30 ECTS Spring term 2022.
[55]. Wang, H., Wang, C., & Wu, H. (2016). Using GF-2 Imagery and the Conditional Random Field Model
for Urban Forest Cover Mapping. Remote Sensing Letters, 7(4), 378–387.
https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2016.1142682
[56]. Westphal, E., & Seitz, H. (2021). A machine learning method for defect detection and visualization in
selective laser sintering based on convolutional neural networks. Additive Manufacturing, 41, 101965.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.101965
[57]. Yang, H., Haist, T., Gronle, M., &Osten, W. (2017). Simulation of microscopic metal surfaces based
on measured microgeometry. Tm - TechnischesMessen, 84(7–8), 493–501.
https://doi.org/10.1515/teme-2017-0019
[58]. Zhou, X., Wang, Y., Xiao, C., Zhu, Q., Lu, X., Zhang, H., Ge, J., & Zhao, H. (2019). Automated
Visual Inspection of Glass Bottle Bottom With Saliency Detection and Template Matching. IEEE
Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 68(11), 4253–
4267.https://doi.org/10.1109/TIM.2018.2886977

AI Driven Industry 4 0 Advancing Quality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

AI Driven Industry 4 0 Advancing Quality

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AI Driven Industry 4 0 Advancing Quality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Makund Arora, International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, Vol.12 Issue.8, August- 2023, pg.

Available Online at www.ijcsmc.com

International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing

IJCSMC, Vol. 12, Issue. 8, August 2023, pg.16 – 32

AI-Driven Industry 4.0: Advancing Quality

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 16

1.2 Problem Statement:

Fig1: Deep learning-based automatic detection of defective processes Algorithm

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 17

2.1 Literature Review:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 18

2.2 Significance of the study:

2.3 Industry 4.0 and Quality Control:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 19

2.4 Image Processing Techniques for Defect Detection:

2.5 Machine Learning Approaches for Defect Classification:

2.6 Existing Research and Gaps:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 20

3.1 Data Collection and Pre-processing:

3.2 Image Processing Pipeline:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 21

3.3 Feature Extraction and Selection:

4.2 Integration of the Image Processing System:

4.3 User Interface Design:

Systems for Machine:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 22

4.4 The algorithm for our MI classification is as follows:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 23

5. Analysis and outcomes from experiments

The Percentage of correct classification when there are defects

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 24

Table1 (P.A)- Proposed Approaches, I-mi-SVM average, II -MIL-Boost, III-MILES,IV-

5.1 Model Training and Evaluation:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 25

Fig2.: Neural Network Architecture for Industry 4.0 General Mode

5.3 Testing and sensitivity Analysis:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 26

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 27

5.4 Comparison with Manual Inspection Methods:

5.5 Robustness and Efficiency Analysis:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 28

6.1 Contributions to Knowledge:

6.2 Limitations and Future Work:

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 29

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 30

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 31

© 2023, IJCSMC All Rights Reserved 32

You might also like