- 21 Dec 2022
- 1 Minute to read
- Print
- DarkLight
- PDF
Use Case: False Positives on Noise or Artifacts on Images
- Updated on 21 Dec 2022
- 1 Minute to read
- Print
- DarkLight
- PDF
Overview
There may be times when a Model has multiple False Positives on noise or artifacts. This article will help you:
- Identify the signal and error
- Diagnose the root cause
- Implement the fix
Identify the Signal and Error
Your model may have difficulty differentiating between an area with noise and a defect. In this case, you will see these error signals:
Step | Observation |
---|---|
Look at the summary | False Positives of a certain Class |
Look at the visualization | Model predicts a certain Class when the area is actually noise |
Diagnose the Root Cause
The root cause is that the noise and artifacts look similar to the actual object to detect, so the Model gets confused. Look through your Train Set and see if you have sufficient samples with noise.

Take a look at the image below. The Model falsely predicts an oil spot defect when the area is actually noise in the image.

This error occurs in the following Prediction as well.

Fix
Try one of the fixes below if you have False Positives on noise or artifacts:
- Improve your image acquisition technique or use custom data augmentation to make the training data look more like the noisy validation data. This will make your Model more robust.
- Filter out Predictions in the area that is not the region of interest by their location in the image or the pixel values.