See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262604110

Automated Fabric Defect Inspection: A Survey of Classifiers

Article  in  International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology · February 2014

DOI: 10.5121/ijfcst.2014.4102 · Source: arXiv

CITATIONS READS
11 1,097

4 authors:

Md. Tarek Habib Rahat Hossain Faisal

Daffodil International University University of Barisal, Barisal, Bangladesh
47 PUBLICATIONS   249 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   15 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

M. Rokonuzzaman Farruk Ahmed

28 PUBLICATIONS   278 CITATIONS   
Independent University, Bangladesh
26 PUBLICATIONS   113 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

E-Commerce View project

Bangla Automatic Spell Checking & Correction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Md. Tarek Habib on 14 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

AUTOMATED FABRIC DEFECT INSPECTION: A

SURVEY OF CLASSIFIERS
Md. Tarek Habib1, Rahat Hossain Faisal2, M. Rokonuzzaman3, Farruk Ahmed4
1
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Prime University, Bangladesh
2
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Barisal University, Bangladesh
3
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Independent University, Bangladesh
4
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Independent University, Bangladesh

ABSTRACT
Quality control at each stage of production in textile industry has become a key factor to retaining the
existence in the highly competitive global market. Problems of manual fabric defect inspection are lack of
accuracy and high time consumption, where early and accurate fabric defect detection is a significant
phase of quality control. Computer vision based, i.e. automated fabric defect inspection systems are
thought by many researchers of different countries to be very useful to resolve these problems. There are
two major challenges to be resolved to attain a successful automated fabric defect inspection system. They
are defect detection and defect classification. In this work, we discuss different techniques used for
automated fabric defect classification, then show a survey of classifiers used in automated fabric defect
inspection systems, and finally, compare these classifiers by using performance metrics. This work is
expected to be very useful for the researchers in the area of automated fabric defect inspection to
understand and evaluate the many potential options in this field.

KEYWORDS
Fabric Defect, Computer Vision, Defect Classification, Performance Metrics, Artificial Neural Network
(ANN), Comparative Analysis.

1. INTRODUCTION

Quality assurance of product is considered as one of the most important focuses in the industrial
production. So is textile industry too. Textile product quality is seriously degraded by defects.
Failure to early defect detection costs time, money and consumer satisfaction. So, early and
accurate fabric defect detection is an important phase of quality control. Manual inspection is
time consuming and the level of accuracy is not satisfactory enough to meet the present demand
of the highly competitive international market. Hence, expected quality cannot be maintained
with manual inspection. Automated, i.e. computer vision based fabric defect inspection system is
the solution to the problems caused by manual inspection. Automated fabric defect inspection
system has been attracting extensive attention of the researchers of many countries for years.
Automated fabric defect inspection system mainly involves two challenging problems, namely
defect detection and defect classification.

Even though many classifiers have already been used, none of the classification techniques is that
much effective rather they are relative. In fact, deployment of these techniques varies according
to the environment. In this paper, we describe different defect classification techniques. We hope
that the paper would be useful for researchers and developers to choose the best one among

DOI:10.5121/ijfcst.2014.4102 17
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

various options of defect classification techniques while working on an automated fabric defect
inspection system.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Some efforts have been made for the survey of automated, i.e. computer vision based inspection
systems [1, 2], where not a large number of attempts have been made for survey of automated, i.e.
computer vision based fabric defect inspection systems [3-6]. All of them have concentrated on
defect detection, where none of them has concentrated on defect classification. Kumar [3] has
used about 150 references for his comprehensive survey of automated fabric defect inspection
systems. His survey has been limited to defect detection methodologies only. Likewise, the
surveys of Mahajan et al. [4], Ngan et al. [5] and Shanbhag et al. [6] have been done on defect
detection techniques only. Moreover, their information collection and organization have not been
well enough.

3. FABRIC DEFECTS
The presence of fabric defect makes the final garment product faulty. It has been reported in [7]
that fabric defects cause about 85% of the defects detected in the garment industry. Fabric prices
decrease by 45%–65% for second or off quality goods [8]. It is therefore of great importance that
these defects are detected, recognized and prevented from reoccurring. There are a large number
of types of fabric defects. Among them, color yarn, missing yarn, hole, slub, crease mark and spot
are the notable ones, which are shown in Figure 1. The quality of textile products

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

isFigure
Figure1.1.Some
severely Some notable
notable
affected bytypes
typesofofdefects
defects. defectsoccurred
occurred
Failure ininfabrics.
to early fabrics.
defect(a)
(a)Color
Coloryarn.
detectionyarn.(b)
(b)Crease
incurs Creasemark.
mark. in
overheads (c)
(c)terms
Hole.
Hole.(d)
of
(d)
Missing
Missingyarn.
yarn. (e)
(e)
Spot.
Spot.(f)
(f)Slub.
Slub.
money, time and customer satisfaction. Therefore early and accurate fabric defect detection is an
18
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

important phase of quality improvement. An automated fabric defect inspection system increase
the product quality, which poses improved productivity to conform to customer needs and to
lessen the costs associated with quality degradation. In automated fabric defect inspection, as the
fabric is produced, inspection is automatically done. This process is continued by detecting the
defect in fabric and then by classifying the fabric based on some features of the defect. It has been
reported in [4] that the investment in the automated fabric defect inspection system is beneficial
taking decrease in labor cost and associated advantages into account.

4. FABRIC DEFECT INSPECTION PROCESS

The development of an automated, i.e. computer vision based system for fabric defect inspection
involves several steps as shown in Figure 2. Each step has effects on the performances of the
subsequent steps. Weak design and implementation of a step make the subsequent steps
complicated, which results in harder development of the system. So each step has a lot of
importance in the development of a fully automated system for textile industry. An automated
fabric inspection system is comprised with the following steps shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Different stages of an automated fabric defect inspection system.

In this work, we mainly focus on only one step of the development of computer vision based
fabric defect inspection system. That is the classification stage as shown in Figure 2.

A number of attempts have been made for computer vision based fabric defect inspection [9-31].
Only few of them have focused on classification, where the majority have concentrated on defect
detection. Mainly three defect-detection techniques [3, 11], namely statistical, spectral and model-
based, have been deployed. A number of techniques have been used for classification. Among
them, artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine (SVM), clustering and statistical
inference are notable.

5. PERFORMANCE METRICS OF CLASSIFIERS

Different performance metrics can be considered to measure the performance of a classifier.
Classification accuracy, model complexity and training time are considered as three most
important performance metrics for an automated fabric defect inspection system.

19
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

6. A SURVEY OF CLASSIFIERS

Different techniques have been applied in classification. Among them - ANNs, support vector
machines (SVMs), clustering and statistical inference are the prominent ones.

6.1. Statistical Inference

In [21] and [22], statistical inference is used for classification. Cohen et al. [21] have chosen
statistical test for classification. They have used likelihood-ratio test as statistical test in order to
implement binary classification, i.e. categorization on only one property, defective or defect-free.
Campbell et al. [22] have used hypothesis testing for classification. They also have implemented
classification on only defective or defect-free classes. Categorization of defect-free and defective
fabrics only is not the ultimate goal of fabric defect classification.

6.2. Support Vector Machine

Murino et al. [13] have used SVMs for classification. They have worked on spatial domain. They
have used features of three types. The features have been extracted from gray-scale histogram,
shape of defect and co-occurrence matrix. The feature extraction process has been supposed to be
complex due to some of the features. The basic SVM scheme is designed for binary classification
problem. They have used SVMs to solve multiclass problem, i.e. distinct categorization of
defects. They have implemented SVMs with 1-vs-1 binary decision tree scheme in order to solve
the multiclass problem. Two data sets, i.e. sets of images have been separately used in their entire
work. One set contained 11 types of defects and the other set contained 9 types of defects.

6.3. Clustering

Campbell et al. [20] have applied model-based clustering for defect classification. Clustering is
not a good choice for real-time systems like computer vision based fabric inspection systems.

6.4. Artificial Neural Network

ANNs have been deployed as classifiers in a number of articles. Various learning algorithms have
been applied to train the ANNs.

Habib and Rokonuzzaman [9] have worked with four types of defects and used
counterpropagation neural network (CPN) to classify the defects. They focused on feature
selection instead of paying attention to the CPN model. They have not done thorough
investigation on the applicability of CPN model in the automated fabric defect inspection domain.
Backpropagation learning algorithm has been used in [11], [14], [17], [18] and [26]. Saeidi et al.
[11] have trained their ANN by backpropagation algorithm so as to deal with multiclass problem,
i.e. categorizing defects distinctly. They have done on-line implementation after performing off-
line experiments. In both cases, they have used 6 types of defects. Their work is on frequency
domain. Karayiannis et al. [14] have used an ANN trained by backpropagation algorithm in order
to solve multiclass problem. They have used 7 types of defects. They have used statistical texture
features. An ANN trained by backpropagation algorithm has been deployed by Kuo and Lee [17]
in order to deal with multiclass problem. 4 types of defects have been used by them. Maximum
length, maximum width and gray level of defects have been considered as features. So the feature
number has become too small. They have found good classification accuracy because the sample
size was also small. There can be the case that their approach will not successfully classify
20
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

defects due to this small number of features when the sample size tends to be much large.
Mitropulos et al. [18] have trained their ANN by backpropagation algorithm so as to deal with
multiclass problem. 7 types of defects have been used by them. Although they have used first and
second order statistical features, the feature number has been small. Moreover their sample size
was small too. It seems that their approach performed good due to the small sample size. There
can be the case that their approach will work poorly for this small number of features when the
sample size tends to be much large. Habib and Rokonuzzaman [26] have used fully connected
feedforward ANN to deal with multiclass problem. They have trained their ANN by
backpropagation algorithm. They have used 4 types of defects. They have used features involving
defect size and shape.

Resilient backpropagation learning algorithm has been used in [12] and [31]. Islam et al. [12]
have designed their ANN trained by resilient backpropagation algorithm in order to deal with
multiclass problem. They have worked with more than 2 types of defects. That means they have
considered two types of defects as two major types and all other types of defects as a single major
type. The area, number of parts and sharp factor of defect have been used by them as features and
therefore the feature number has become too small. Moreover, they have justified the features
very little. They got some success because the sample size was small. There is a great chance that
their approach will poorly classify defects due to this small number of features when the sample
size tends to be much large. Islam et al. [31] have also employed an ANN trained by resilient
backpropagation algorithm in order to address multiclass problem. More than 2 types of defects
have been used by them. That means two types of defects have been considered as two major
types and all other types of defects have been considered as a single major type. They have used
three features, namely the area of faulty portion, number of objects and shape factor. So the
feature number has become too small. In spite of the too small feature number, their approach
worked. It seems that the small sample size was the reason behind this. It is supposed to happen
that their approach will not achieve the result as per expectation due to this small feature number
when the sample size goes much large.

Learning vector quantization (LVQ) algorithm was applied by Shady et al. [19] so as to train their
ANNs. Their ANNs have been implemented in order to handle multiclass problem. They have
used 6 types of defects. Separately work has taken place in defect detection process for spatial
and frequency domains. That means statistical technique and spectral technique, i.e. Fourier
transform, have separately been deployed for detecting defects. In case of statistical technique, a
grid measuring scheme has been used for calculating the row and column vectors of images.
Statistical features, e.g. mean, median etc are extracted from the row and column vectors. Kumar
[15] has used two ANNs separately. The first one trained by backpropagation algorithm has been
designed for binary classification, i.e. categorization only on defective or defect-free. It has been
shown that the inspection system with this ANN is not effective in terms of cost. So he has further
used linear ANN. He has applied least mean square error (LMS) algorithm so as to train the
network. The inspection system with this ANN is cost-effective, but it cannot deal with multiclass
problem. Inability to deal with multiclass problem, i.e. binary-classification ability, does not fulfil
the ultimate need of fabric defect classification. Karras et al. [16] have also separately used two
ANNs. One ANN has been trained by backpropagation algorithm. The other ANN used by them
is Kohonen’s Self-Organizing Feature Maps (SOFM). First and second order statistical-texture
features have been used for both ANNs. Both of the ANNs have been designed to solve binary
classification problem, i.e. categorization of only defective and defect-free, which does not fulfil
the ultimate need of fabric defect classification. Table 1 summarizes the discussion in this
paragraph.

21
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

7. COMPARISON OF CLASSIFIERS
The articles discussed in the previous section are typical examples of effort for computer vision
based fabric defect inspection. Considering these articles as a sample, we make some comparative
analysis as shown in Fig. 3. A little more effort has been made to deal with the multiclass
problem, i.e. categorizing defects distinctly, than to implement binary classification, i.e.
categorization of only defective and defect-free classes. This is shown in Fig. 3(a). We see from
Fig. 3(b) that ANNs have been chosen for classification much more than any other methods.

Table 1. Summary of the articles discussed.

Capability of Classifying
Reference Classifier Learning Algorithm
Defects Distinctly
[9] √ ANN Counterpropagation
[11] √ ANN Backpropagation
[12] √ ANN Resilient backpropagation
[13] √ SVMs NA
[14] √ ANN Backpropagation
× ANN Backpropagation
[15]
× ANN Least mean square error (LMS)
× ANN Backpropagation
[16] Kohonen’s Self-Organizing Feature Maps
× ANN
(SOFM)
[17] √ ANN Backpropagation
[18] √ ANN Backpropagation
[19] √ ANN Learning vector quantization (LVQ)
Model-based
[20] √ NA
clustering
[21] × Statistical test NA
[22] × Statistical test NA
[26] √ ANN Backpropagation
[31] √ ANN Resilient backpropagation

SVM (5.88%)

Binary Neural Network

Classification (76.47%)
(35.29%)
Multiple Model-Based
Classification Clustering
(64.71%) (5.88%)
Statistical Test
(11.76%)

(a) (b)
Figure 3. Comparative analysis of the articles discussed. (a) Dealing with classification problem. (b) Using
classification methods.

22
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

8. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS

We have found from the comparative discussion of the articles in the previous section that ANNs
have been chosen for classification much more than any other methods. Considering these articles
as a sample, we make one more comparative analysis as shown in Fig. 4. We see from Fig. 4 that
backpropagation is the mostly used learning algorithm when ANNs are used as classifier. Finally,
we compare the performance of the ANN models in terms of three performance matrices –
accuracy, model complexity and training time as shown in Table 2.

CPN (7.69%)

Backpropagation
(69.23%)
Kohonen’s SOFM
(7.69%)
LMS Algorithm
(7.69%)
LVQ (7.69%)

Figure 4. Comparison of the learning algorithms used for ANNs in the articles discussed.

Table 2. Comparison of ANN based classification models.

Performance Metrics
Number Number Model
Fabric Training Time Complexity
Article of Input of
Type (Number of (Number of Accuracy
Sites Classes
Elapsed Cycle) Computing
Units)
Knitted
[9] 4 6 6 4-7-6 98.97%
fabric
Knitted 15 7 7350 15-8-7 78.4%
[11]
fabric NM1 NM NM NM 96.57%
[12] NM 3 4 NM 3-40-4-4 77%
Web
[14] textile 13 8 NM 13-5-8 94%
fabric
Web
[18] textile 4 8 NM 4-5-8 91%
fabric
Knitted 7 7 NM 7-7 90.21%
[19]
fabric 6 7 NM 6-7 91.9%
Knitted
[26] 4 6 137043 4-12-6 100%
fabric
[31] NM 3 4 NM 3-44-4 76.5%
1
NM: Not Mentioned

23
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

9. CONCLUSION

In this paper, major defect classification techniques for automated fabric defect inspection system
have been considered initially. After that defect classifiers of automated fabric defect inspection
systems have been surveyed. Finally, we have compared these classifiers based on three
prominent performance metrics – accuracy, model complexity and training time. We hope that
this paper would be useful for every newcomer to the area of automated fabric defect inspection.

REFERENCES

[1] X. Xie, “A Review of Recent Advances in Surface Defect Detection using Texture analysis
Techniques,” Electronic Letters on Computer Vision and Image Analysis, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1-22,
2008.
[2] T. S. Newman and A. K. Jain, “A Survey of Automated Visual Inspection,” Computer Vision and
Image Understanding, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 231-262, March 1995.
[3] A. Kumar, “Computer-Vision-Based Fabric Defect Detection: A Survey,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 348-363, January 2008.
[4] P. M. Mahajan, S. R. Kolhe, and P. M. Patil, “A review of automatic fabric defect detection
techniques,” Advances in Computational Research, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 18-29, 2009.
[5] H. Y. T. Ngan, G. K. H. Pang, and N. H. C. Yung, “Automated fabric defect detection-A review,”
Image and Vision Computing, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 442-458, 2011.
[6] P. M. Shanbhag, M. P. Deshmukh, and S. R. Suralkar, “Overview: Methods of Automatic Fabric
Defect Detection,” Global Journal of Engineering, Design & Technology, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 42-46,
2012.
[7] P. Sengottuvelan, A. Wahi, and A. Shanmugam, “Automatic Fault Analysis of Textile fabric Using
Imaging Systems,” Research Journal of Applied Sciences, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 26-31, 2008.
[8] K. Srinivasan, P. H. Dastor, P. Radhakrishnaihan, and S. Jayaraman, “FDAS: A knowledge-based
frame detection work for analysis of defects in woven textile structures,” Journal of Textile Institute,
vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 431-447, 1992.
[9] M. T. Habib and M. Rokonuzzaman, “A Set of Geometric Features for Neural Network-Based Textile
Defect Classification,” ISRN Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2012, Article ID 643473, 16 pages,
2012.
[10] R. Stojanovic, P. Mitropulos, C. Koulamas, Y.A. Karayiannis, S. Koubias, and G. Papadopoulos,
“Real-time Vision based System for Textile Fabric Inspection,” Real-Time Imaging, vol. 7, no. 6, pp.
507-518, 2001.
[11] R. G. Saeidi, M. Latifi, S. S. Najar, and A. Ghazi Saeidi, “Computer Vision-Aided Fabric Inspection
System for On-Circular Knitting Machine,” Textile Research Journal, vol. 75, no. 6, pp. 492-497,
2005.
[12] M. A. Islam, S. Akhter, and T. E. Mursalin, “Automated Textile Defect Recognition System using
Computer Vision and Artificial Neural Networks,” Proceedings World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology, vol. 13, pp. 1-7, May 2006.
[13] V. Murino, M. Bicego, and I. A. Rossi, “Statistical Classification of Raw Textile Defects,” icpr, pp.
311-314, 17th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR'04), vol. 4, 2004.
[14] Y. A. Karayiannis, R. Stojanovic, P. Mitropoulos, C. Koulamas, T. Stouraitis, S. Koubias, and G.
Papadopoulos, “Defect Detection and Classification on Web Textile Fabric Using Multiresolution
Decomposition and Neural Networks,” Proceedings on the 6th IEEE International Conference on
Electronics, Circuits and Systems, Pafos, Cyprus, September 1999, pp. 765-768.
[15] A. Kumar, “Neural Network based detection of local textile defects,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 36, pp.
1645-1659, 2003.
[16] D. A. Karras, S. A. Karkanis, and B. G. Mertzios, “Supervised and Unsupervised Neural Network
Methods applied to Textile Quality Control based on Improved Wavelet Feature Extraction
Techniques,” International Journal on Computer Mathematics, vol. 67, pp. 169-181, 1998.
[17] C.-F. J. Kuo and C.-J. Lee, “A Back-Propagation Neural Network for Recognizing Fabric Defects,”
Textile Research Journal, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 147-151, 2003.

24
 International Journal in Foundations of Computer Science & Technology (IJFCST), Vol.4, No.1, January 2014

[18] P. Mitropoulos, C. Koulamas, R. Stojanovic, S. Koubias, G. Papadopoulos, and G. Karayiannis,

“Real-Time Vision System for Defect Detection and Neural Classification of Web Textile Fabric,”
Proceedings SPIE, vol. 3652, San Jose, California, pp. 59-69, January 1999.
[19] E. Shady, Y. Gowayed, M. Abouiiana, S. Youssef, and C. Pastore, “Detection and Classification of
Defects in Knitted Fabric Structures,” Textile Research Journal, vol. 76, No. 4, pp. 295-300, 2006.
[20] J. G. Campbell, C. Fraley, D. Stanford, F. Murtagh, and A. E. Raftery, “Model-Based Methods for
Textile Fault Detection,” International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, vol. 10 Issue 4,
pp. 339-346, Jul 1999.
[21] F. S. Cohen, Z. Fan, and S. Attali, “Automated Inspection of Textile Fabrics Using Textural Models,”
IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 8, no. 13, pp. 803-808, Aug. 1991.
[22] J. G. Campbell, A. A. Hashim, T. M. McGinnity, and T. F. Lunney. “Flaw Detection in Woven
Textiles by Neural Network,” in Fifth Irish Neural Networks Conference, St. Patrick's College,
Maynooth, pp. 92-99, Sept. 1995.
[23] K. L. Mak, P. Peng, and H. Y. K. Lau, “A Real-Time Computer Vision System for Detecting Defects
in Textile Fabrics,” IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, Hong Kong, China, 14-
17, pp. 469-474, Dec. 2005.
[24] A. Baykut, A. Atalay, A. Erçil, and M. Güler, “Real-Time Defect Inspection of Textured Surfaces,”
Real-Time Imaging, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 17-27, Feb. 2000.
[25] F. S. Cohen and Z. Fan, “Rotation and Scale Invariant Texture Classification,” in Proc. IEEE Conf.
Robot. Autom., vol. 3, pp. 1394-1399, April 1988..
[26] M. A. Islam, S. Akhter, T. E. Mursalin, and M. A. Amin, “A Suitable Neural Network to Detect
Textile Defects,” Neural Information Processing, SpringerLink, vol. 4233, pp. 430-438, October
2006.
[27] A. Abouelela, H. M. Abbas, H. Eldeeb, A. A. Wahdan, and S. M. Nassar, “Automated Vision System
for Localizing Structural Defects in Textile Fabrics,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 26, Issue 10,
pp. 1435-1443, July 2005.
[28] W. Jasper, J. Joines, and J. Brenzovich, “Fabric Defect Detection Using a Genetic Algorithm Tuned
Wavelet Filter,” Journal of the Textile Institute, vol. 96, Issue 1, pp. 43-54, January 2005.
[29] Y. Shu and Z. Tan, “Fabric Defects Automatic Detection Using Gabor Filters,” World Congress on
Intelligent Control and Automation (WCICA 2004), Hangzhou, China, vol. 4, pp. 3378-3380, June
2004.
[30] M. Salahuddin and M. Rokonuzzaman, “Adaptive Segmentation of Knit Fabric Images for Automated
Defect Detection in Semi-structured Environments,” Proceedings of the 8th ICCIT, pp. 255-260,
2005.
[31] M. T. Habib and M. Rokonuzzaman, “Distinguishing Feature Selection for Fabric Defect
Classification Using Neural Network”, Journal of Multimedia, vol. 6, no. 5, October 2011.

Author

Md. Tarek Habib received his B.Sc. degree in Computer Science and M.S. degree in
Computer Science and Engineering from BRAC University and North South
University in 2006 and 2009 respectively. He is an Assistant Professor in the
Department of Computer Science and Engineering of Prime University, Bangladesh.
His research interest is in artificial intelligence, especially neural networks and
computer vision.

25

View publication stats