--- license: agpl-3.0 library_name: ultralytics pipeline_tag: object-detection base_model: Ultralytics/YOLO26 tags: - ultralytics - yolo - yolo26 - object-detection - pcb - defect-detection - manufacturing - aoi model-index: - name: pcb-defect-detection results: - task: type: object-detection dataset: name: HRIPCB (PKU-Market-PCB), board-grouped split type: hripcb metrics: - type: map50 value: 0.8390 name: "mAP50(B)" - type: map50-95 value: 0.3881 name: "mAP50-95(B)" --- # PCB Bare-Board Defect Detection (YOLO26) Ultralytics **YOLO26** (NMS-free, end-to-end detection head) fine-tuned to detect 6 classes of bare printed-circuit-board defects: `missing_hole`, `mouse_bite`, `open_circuit`, `short`, `spur`, `spurious_copper`. - **Code, training notebooks, benchmark/ablation scripts**: [https://github.com/tun0000/pcb-defect-detection](https://github.com/tun0000/pcb-defect-detection) - **Interactive demo**: [Space](https://huggingface.co/spaces/betty0/pcb-defect-detection) ## Why this matters for AOI (Automated Optical Inspection) Per-class **recall** approximates an inspection line's escape rate (missed defects that reach the next stage); **precision** approximates the false-kill rate that drives manual re-inspection cost. YOLO26's NMS-free head means the exported ONNX/TensorRT graph needs only a confidence-threshold filter at inference time - no separate NMS step to tune or maintain. ## Results (test split, never used for model selection) This model was trained with a **board-grouped split** (8 boards train / 1 val / 1 test - the test board's images never appear in training) rather than a random split, specifically to avoid the background leakage that inflates numbers when a random split lets the same physical board's background appear in both train and test. | split strategy | mAP50 | mAP50-95 | test images | test instances | |---|---|---|---|---| | **board-grouped (this model)** | 0.8390 | 0.3881 | 120 | 358 | | random (leakage control, separate model) | 0.9603 | 0.5082 | 72 | 284 | The random-split control model scores 12.1 mAP50 points higher - that gap is background leakage, not a better model. The board-grouped numbers above are the honest ones to cite for this model's real-world generalization. ### Per-class (board-grouped model, this repo) | class | AP50 | AP50-95 | precision | recall | |---|---|---|---|---| | missing_hole | 0.9806 | 0.5825 | 0.9072 | 0.9667 | | mouse_bite | 0.9362 | 0.4563 | 0.9821 | 0.9141 | | open_circuit | 0.8963 | 0.4960 | 0.9584 | 0.7802 | | short | 0.5649 | 0.1282 | 0.7245 | 0.6271 | | spur | 0.8632 | 0.3982 | 0.9335 | 0.7024 | | spurious_copper | 0.7929 | 0.2677 | 0.8896 | 0.6717 | ## Usage ```python from huggingface_hub import hf_hub_download from ultralytics import YOLO path = hf_hub_download(repo_id="betty0/pcb-defect-detection", filename="best.pt") model = YOLO(path) results = model.predict("your_pcb_image.jpg", conf=0.25) ``` An ONNX export (`best.onnx`, NMS-free e2e graph, `(1, 300, 6)` output = `[x1, y1, x2, y2, conf, class_id]` in letterboxed 640x640 coordinates) is also included for torch-free deployment - see the GitHub repo's `src/pcb_defect/e2e_onnx.py` for a minimal ONNX Runtime inference pipeline (this is also what the Space above runs). ## Training data [HRIPCB / PKU-Market-PCB](https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/akhatova/pcb-defects) (693 images, 2,953 annotated defects, 10 template boards). The Kaggle mirror used to obtain this data lists its license as "Unknown" - cite the original paper: > Huang, W., & Wei, P. (2019). A PCB Dataset for Defects Detection and Classification. arXiv:1901.08204 (https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.08204). ## Limitations - Only 10 unique template boards exist in the source dataset; 8 were used for training. Per-board visual variance is high, so board-grouped val/test metrics carry more variance than a larger-board-count dataset would. - Defects are the dataset's synthetically-introduced defects, not naturally-occurring production defects - real AOI imagery (lighting, focus, background) will differ (domain shift). Validate against target production imagery before deployment. - `short` and `spurious_copper` are the weakest classes (see per-class table above) even after full training - this is a real, repeatable finding (confirmed independently in a separate SAHI slicing-inference ablation), not measurement noise. - Board-grouped metrics are **not directly comparable** to papers/notebooks reporting on a random split of this same dataset (see the leakage comparison table above). ## License Code and weights are released under **AGPL-3.0** (required by Ultralytics' YOLO26 license). Commercial use requires an [Ultralytics Enterprise License](https://www.ultralytics.com/license).