Author Affiliations
1School of Computer Science and Technology, Xinjiang Normal University, Urumqi, Xinjiang 830054, China2College of Computer Science and Technology, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 116024, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Deep residual network frame for strip steel surface defect recognition based on attention mechanism
Fig. 2. Strip surface defect dataset. (a) Cr; (b) In; (c) Pa; (d) Ps; (e) Rs; (f) Sc
Fig. 3. Data preprocessing
Fig. 4. False color enhancement effect. (a) Before enhancement; (b) after enhancement
Fig. 5. Softmax Loss curve
Fig. 6. Training curves of model under different learning rates. (a) Accuracy curves; (b) loss function curves
Fig. 7. Pictures with different signal-to-noise ratios. (a) No noise; (b) 50 dB; (c) 40 dB; (d) 30 dB; (e) 20 dB
Fig. 8. Confusion matrix of each model. (a) ResNet50; (b) A-ResNet50
Type of defects | Cr | In | Pa | Ps | Rs | Sc |
---|
Before expansion | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | 300 | After expansion | 900 | 900 | 900 | 900 | 900 | 900 |
|
Table 1. Distribution of strip surface defect datasets
Learning rate | Recognition accuracy /% | Training accuracy /% | Training loss value | Average accuracy /% |
---|
Cr | In | Pa | Ps | Rs | Sc |
---|
0.01 | 100 | 95.00 | 100 | 85.00 | 100 | 98.33 | 99.24 | 0.0986 | 96.32 | 0.001 | 100 | 98.33 | 100 | 96.67 | 98.33 | 98.33 | 99.31 | 0.0205 | 98.61 | 0.0001 | 90.00 | 98.33 | 100 | 88.33 | 100 | 98.33 | 95.58 | 0.1154 | 95.83 | 0.00001 | 98.33 | 96.67 | 100 | 78.33 | 100 | 96.67 | 81.74 | 0.5037 | 95.00 |
|
Table 2. Recognition accuracy of each defect under different learning rates
Model | Recognition accuracy /% |
---|
20 dB | 30 dB | 40 dB | 50 dB |
---|
LBP[7] | 22.78 | 63.57 | 69.26 | 75.05 | MB-LBP[7] | 25.76 | 71.35 | 90.24 | 91.83 | Improved MB-LBP[7] | 30.63 | 78.56 | 95.66 | 97.00 | ResNet50 | 21.65 | 75.56 | 92.22 | 95.56 | A-ResNet50 | 34.44 | 88.33 | 94.44 | 98.61 |
|
Table 3. Anti-noise ability of each model under Gaussian noise with different signal-to-noise ratios
Defectcategory | Number of samples | Ppr | Recallrate | F1 |
---|
Cr | In | Pa | Ps | Rs | Sc |
---|
Cr | 60 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | In | 0 | 59 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.967 | 0.983 | 0.975 | Pa | 0 | 0 | 60 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.968 | 1.000 | 0.984 | Ps | 0 | 1 | 0 | 58 | 0 | 0 | 0.983 | 0.967 | 0.975 | Rs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 59 | 0 | 1.000 | 0.983 | 0.992 | Sc | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 59 | 1.000 | 0.983 | 0.992 |
|
Table 4. Recognition ability of proposed model A-ResNet50
Model | Recognition accuracy /% | Average accuracy /% | Unit inference time /s |
---|
Cr | In | Pa | Ps | Rs | Sc |
---|
Model in Ref.[5] | 97.00 | 94.00 | 98.00 | 98.00 | 97.00 | 93.00 | 96.17 | 0.065 | Model in Ref.[7] | 99.00 | 98.00 | 97.00 | 96.00 | 97.00 | 95.00 | 97.00 | 0.058 | AlexNet | 100 | 98.33 | 100 | 75.00 | 100 | 98.33 | 95.28 | 0.016 | A-AlexNet | 100 | 95.00 | 100 | 85.00 | 100 | 98.33 | 96.39 | 0.017 | GoogleNet | 81.67 | 100 | 91.67 | 81.67 | 90.00 | 98.33 | 90.56 | 0.389 | A-GoogleNet | 93.33 | 100 | 96.67 | 90.00 | 90.00 | 100 | 95.00 | 0.041 | ResNet50 | 93.33 | 95.00 | 100 | 85.00 | 100 | 100 | 95.56 | 0.074 | A-ResNet50 | 100 | 98.33 | 100 | 96.67 | 98.33 | 98.33 | 98.61 | 0.078 | ResNet101 | 100 | 98.33 | 100 | 88.33 | 98.33 | 100 | 97.50 | 0.121 | A-ResNet101 | 100 | 96.67 | 100 | 91.67 | 100 | 100 | 98.05 | 0.130 |
|
Table 5. Recognition results of strip steel surface defects by different models