SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Muskan Saraf

Publications and source records attributed to Muskan Saraf.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Spatial Attention Supervision for Defect Localization: Exploiting Ground-Truth Masks as Training Signal in Diffusion-Augmented Defect Detection

Ground-truth defect masks in industrial inspection datasets are typically reserved for evaluation. This paper repurposes them as spatial supervision signals during training of classification networks, teaching a model not just what to predict but where to look. The method adds an activation-based attention alignment loss that steers convolutional feature maps toward defect regions, in a mixed-supervision formulation that also accommodates samples without masks, such as diffusion-generated images. Combined with DDPM augmentation, synthetic images contribute quantity while masks contribute spatial precision. We evaluate 85 models (four CNN backbones under a 2x2 data/training factorial over five seeds, plus a Swin-V2-T transformer baseline) on the MVTec-AD bottle benchmark, with localization measured on held-out defect images excluded from classifier gradient updates. Main findings: (1) attention-guided training improves activation-based localization (Pixel-AUROC) by +18.0% for EfficientNetB0 with augmentation (p=0.005, Cohen's d=2.6) and +18.7% for ResNet50 (p=0.008), significant in four of eight CNN settings (uncorrected for multiple comparisons) with no significant change in classification; (2) for EfficientNetB0 a data x training-mode interaction is significant (p=0.002), consistent with a super-additive effect (+13.6% combined vs +1.6% summed individual effects); (3) architectures with weaker spatial representations benefit most, whereas ConvNeXt-T shows no effect, apparently because its depthwise-convolution activations yield spatially uninformative channel-mean maps; (4) unsupervised PatchCore remains the strongest localizer (Pixel-AUROC=0.983), contextualizing the supervised gains. These results show that existing evaluation masks can act as practical training signals that measurably and reproducibly improve where defect classifiers attend.

cs.CV

Beyond Visualization: Building Decision Intelligence Through Iterative Dashboard Refinement

Effective business intelligence (BI) dashboards evolve through iterative refinement rather than single-pass design. Addressing the lack of structured improvement frameworks in BI practice, this study documents the four-stage evolution of a Power BI dashboard analyzing profitability decline in a fictional retail firm, Global Superstore. Using a dataset of \$12.64 million in sales across seven markets and three product categories, the project demonstrates how feedback-driven iteration and gap analysis convert exploratory visuals into decision-support tools. Guided by four executive questions on profitability, market prioritization, discount effects, and shipping costs, each iteration resolved analytical or interpretive shortcomings identified through collaborative review. Key findings include margin erosion in furniture (6.94% vs. 13.99% for technology), a 20% discount threshold beyond which profitability declined, and \$1.35 million in unrecovered shipping costs. Contributions include: (a) a replicable feedback-driven methodology grounded in iterative gap analysis; (b) DAX-based technical enhancements improving interpretive clarity; (c) an inductively derived six-element narrative framework; and (d) evidence that narrative coherence emerges organically through structured refinement. The methodology suggests transferable value for both BI practitioners and educators, pending validation across diverse organizational contexts.

cs.HC

Quantifying Label-Induced Bias in Large Language Model Self- and Cross-Evaluations

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as evaluators of text quality, yet the validity of their judgments remains underexplored. This study investigates systematic bias in self- and cross-model evaluations across three prominent LLMs: ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude. We designed a controlled experiment in which blog posts authored by each model were evaluated by all three models under four labeling conditions: no attribution, true attribution, and two false-attribution scenarios. Evaluations employed both holistic preference voting and granular quality ratings across three dimensions Coherence, Informativeness, and Conciseness with all scores normalized to percentages for direct comparison. Our findings reveal pronounced asymmetries in model judgments: the "Claude" label consistently elevated scores regardless of actual authorship, while the "Gemini" label systematically depressed them. False attribution frequently reversed preference rankings, producing shifts of up to 50 percentage points in voting outcomes and up to 12 percentage points in quality ratings. Notably, Gemini exhibited severe self-deprecation under true labels, while Claude demonstrated intensified self-preference. These results demonstrate that perceived model identity can substantially distort both high-level judgments and fine-grained quality assessments, independent of content quality. Our findings challenge the reliability of LLM-as-judge paradigms and underscore the critical need for blind evaluation protocols and diverse multi-model validation frameworks to ensure fairness and validity in automated text evaluation and LLM benchmarking.

cs.CL