The FR10 cover images have confident labels and wandering streaks

ClaraBennett0698 · 2026年6月18日 16:06 UTC

回复讨论

主帖中文翻译暂不可用,以下显示英文原文;回复保留原文。 查看英文原文

CL
ClaraBennett0698
Our planned polished-cover inspection calls moving bright streaks scratches. No commissioning yet. Who should own the reference decision before we let these labels determine thresholds?

17 条回复

PR
PriyaBrown0916

I would put the product acceptance owner in charge of the physical judgement, with the vision person responsible for linking images and capture conditions. Neither role can infer the other's answer from a filename

11分
NO
NoraArcher0409

Are the covers still available to examine? I would want to know that before discussing the image settings.

-1分
HA
HazelChan1093

I've seen a shiny ridge called damage because nobody walked over to the sample. Don't just collect votes on the picture. Clara, what was actually observed on the surface?

12分
CL
ClaraBennett0698

Covers retained, Nora. Hazel, nobody has recorded a physical finding. The labels came from image review, not an examination against our cosmetic requirement.

11分
ME
MeiAbbott0081

Then the labels cannot serve as confirmed defects. Preserve the images as observations, but keep uncertainty in the reference set until the responsible person examines and classifies the corresponding regions.

22分
IS
IsabelBell0648

I would give each cover an identity before moving it between people. Mark its orientation in the record, not on the inspected face. Then quality and the camera team can refer to the same area without guessing.

17分
TH
ThomasAdams0103

Would you include an accepted cover that makes a bright streak too? I'm thinking it could expose what the camera is actually reacting to.

12分
CE
CeciliaBowen

Yes, Thomas, provided accepted is an established product judgement. A moving streak by itself does not establish that the cover is acceptable.

17分
RA
RachelChan1131

Our older guessed labels are outside tuning now. Keeping them didn't require trusting them.

24分
AN
AnilArcher0375

I would not throw the difficult images away. Separate evidence with uncertain interpretation from confirmed examples; otherwise the trial becomes suspiciously easy.

12分
RO
RobinChan1121

Anil, yes. A clean folder isn't the same as a capable inspection. Clara, will your new captures include the seating changes that moved the streak?

16分
CL
ClaraBennett0698

Proposed, not scheduled. First quality is to classify the retained regions. Then I'd compare recorded presentation changes with fixed camera settings, rather than changing several things and calling the nicest picture our baseline.

13分
KI
KieranCampbell

Clara, that order makes sense but don't use the same small set for every decision. You can tune until those covers look perfect and still know little about unseen production covers.

9分
PR
PriyaBrown0916

Kieran, agreed. I would identify a separate validation selection with quality, including the expected finish variation; we have not established how broad Clara's retained sample collection is

19分
IS
IsabelBell0648

Thomas, your accepted example would be useful for teaching too. I would show the physical finding and both images together. Otherwise the next person may learn that a bright band always means reject.

10分
CL
ClaraBennett0698

Only a few covers retained, so no production-wide claim. Priya and Kieran, I'll keep validation selection separate from tuning. Quality hasn't supplied the physical classifications yet.

-2分
HA
HazelChan1093

One practical nuisance: who keeps those covers after the meeting? I've watched a reference sample go back into a general parts tray and become impossible to identify a second time.

23分

参与讨论

欢迎来到 Application Robot

所有人都可以阅读论坛。登录或注册后即可发起讨论、回复或上传照片。

忘记密码?

注册账号即表示你同意我们的 使用条款 和 社区准则。请阅读我们的 隐私政策 ,了解我们如何处理你的信息。