← All projects

PROJECT 090 / 102 · Manufacturing

Inspection geometry integrity.

Do image measurements contain impossible bounds or nonpositive areas?

Focused analytical studySteel plate faultsExecuted notebook

THE RESULT

What the data shows

The largest computed metric is 0 for Reversed X bounds; the smallest is 0 for Reversed X bounds. Metric: flagged_rows (Rows flagged).

These rules check internal consistency only; passing them does not certify source labels or image quality.

Inspection geometry integrity — chart from the computed study output
Computed study output. Full values and units are available in the results download.
Computed results · 6 of 6 rows. Values rounded for display; source units and raw column names are retained in the download.
ruleflagged rowschecked rowsflagged share
Reversed X bounds01,9410
Reversed Y bounds01,9410
Nonpositive area01,9410
Negative X perimeter01,9410
Reversed luminosity bounds01,9410
Steel type flags not one-hot01,9410
Download the complete result table ↓

THE METHOD

From source to answer

Explicit geometry validation rules with counts and denominators.

The Python source exposes this study’s transformations. The complete project download includes shared preparation and evaluation routines.

THE NEXT DECISION

What follows from the finding

Review flagged records against original images before correcting measurements.

Where the conclusion stops

Every source row is a recorded fault. The data cannot estimate a production defect rate or distinguish healthy plates. Batch and machine IDs are absent, so grouped exact-input holdouts do not prove factory transfer.

Related studies may reuse observations or holdouts. These are historical analyses; associations and backtests do not demonstrate commercial impact. Further model tuning needs new, untouched evaluation data.