Talk:Machine vision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Robotics (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Machine vision is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page (Talk), where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Technology (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon

Unsourced list[edit]

Moving this unsourced list here per WP:PRESERVE. Per WP:BURDEN this can be restored when reliable sources are provided:

  • Automated Train Examiner (ATEx) Systems
  • Automatic PCB inspection
  • Wood quality inspection
  • Final inspection of sub-assemblies
  • Engine part inspection
  • Label inspection on products
  • Checking medical devices for defects
  • Final inspection cells
  • Robot guidance and checking orientation of components
  • Packaging Inspection
  • Medical vial inspection
  • Food pack checks
  • Verifying engineered components
  • Wafer Dicing
  • Reading of Serial Numbers
  • Inspection of Saw Blades
  • Inspection of Ball Grid Arrays (BGAs)
  • Surface Inspection
  • Measuring of Spark Plugs
  • Molding Flash Detection
  • Inspection of Punched Sheets
  • 3D Plane Reconstruction with Stereo
  • Pose Verification of Resistors
  • Classification of Non-Woven Fabrics

-- Jytdog (talk) 01:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I think that the entries were too specialized anyway. A shorter list of broader areas would be better. North8000 (talk) 13:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Revised list[edit]

Here's a first pass at a more generalized list.

  • Train and vehicle examiner systems
  • Wood product inspection
  • Final inspection of sub-assemblies
  • Automotive component inspection
  • Medical device inspection
  • Robot and motion controller guidance
  • Labeling & Packaging Inspection
  • Reading of Codes & Characters
  • PCB & Semiconductor Inspection including Ball Grid Arrays (BGAs)
  • Surface Inspection

This might present a "sourcing that the sky is blue" quandary, but perhaps we can find a source for a similar list.

North8000 (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

New thought that might help this bruised-and-abused article[edit]

This article is about both a term and a widely-varying set of endeavors which often go by that term It is the term most commonly used to try to assemble and refer to a set of endeavors in that field, although other terms are often used for subsets, supersets and partially overlapping sets of those endeavors.

So, the article needs to both describe the meaning of the term "machine vision", and then provide coverage of the field defined by that term. On the latter the article keeps getting nuked to the point where, 13 years after it's inception, this article about a large and important field looks like little more than a stub. While this may sometimes be an issue with the nukers, it also may also be vulnerable due to using too much etymology type wording in the coverage of the field, and generally organizing the whole article along entomology lines.

For example, let's say there's a common term "Native American History" and an article titled "Native American history" (which there isn't by that name) which opens with a definition of that term. As with machine vision, other groupings and titles may apply to that general topical area. Then, someone builds a section on the Puebloan Culture of the 13th century. That section should probably not be explicitly saying / repeating "Native American history includes the Pueblo Culture of the 13th century. Conversely, somebody should not be nuking that whole section because the sources don't explicitly say that Native American History includes Pueblo Culture of the 13th century. I think that we've had both of these issues here. I plan to try to work on the wording and organizational side. North8000 (talk) 15:50, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

The first step is to develop the etymology & definition section. I started but it needs more work. But I think that the material is well-contained within a couple of the cited sources.North8000 (talk) 16:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your work; i've been watching. Jytdog (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! North8000 (talk) 16:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)