MIAD: A Maintenance Inspection Dataset for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection
Paper • 2211.13968 • Published
You need to agree to share your contact information to access this dataset
This repository is publicly accessible, but you have to accept the conditions to access its files and content.
This dataset is released for research use. Access is reviewed and granted manually by the maintainers. Please state your name, affiliation, and intended use.
Log in or Sign Up to review the conditions and access this dataset content.
210
Outdoor maintenance-inspection anomaly detection over 7 asset scenarios (SYNTHETIC, 3D-rendered; binary masks). Category B, task T-B1, in the unified Smart-Manufacturing SFT schema.
The repository name is an internal task code. See Provenance below for the underlying dataset.
Records
105,000 records (test=35000 · train=70000). Pixel masks are embedded as a mask image column.
Unified SFT schema
| field | type | meaning |
|---|---|---|
query |
str | the question / instruction (model input) |
image |
Image | the input image (bytes embedded); for multi-image rows, a preview of the first view |
images |
list[Image] | (multi-image rows) all input views / modalities for the row, bytes embedded |
annot |
str | the answer — for this dataset: plain-text {label, defect_type} — {good, null} or {anomalous, <defect>}, the defect name from THAT scenario's own closed set (enumerated in the query), following D20/D22. The binary mask column is deferred localization GT |
reasoning |
null | no native CoT in these datasets |
cate |
"B" | SFT category |
task |
"T-xx" | unified task id |
metadata |
str (JSON) | split, provenance, image_path, image_sha256 (dedup key) |
mask |
Image | null | (T-B1/T-B2 only) the pixel ground-truth mask, bytes embedded |
masks |
list[Image] | (multi-image T-B1 / D21) per-view masks aligned with images (None where a view has no defect), or multi-region masks |
Task, mask & split
What this is. MIAD — Maintenance Inspection Anomaly Detection (Bao, Chen, Li, Wang, Fei, Wu, Zhao, Zheng,
arXiv:2211.13968; ICCV 2023 Workshop) — 105,000 512x512 images across 7 outdoor maintenance-inspection
scenarios: catenary_dropper, electrical_insulator, metal_welding, nut_and_bolt, photovoltaic_module,
wind_turbine, witness_mark. The design is perfectly regular: every scenario ships 10,000 good training
images and a 5,000-image test split (2,500 good + 2,500 defective) with 2,500 pixel masks.
These are outdoor assets in service — overhead lines, turbine blades, PV modules — not factory production-line parts, which is what most of this corpus holds.
⚠ THE IMAGERY IS SYNTHETIC. MIAD is generated with 3D graphics software, not photographed. That is the point of
the dataset — it buys free variation in viewpoint, weather and lighting together with exact pixel ground truth —
but a model trained on it learns rendered appearance, and any claim about real-world transfer needs a real-image
test set. Every record carries metadata.synthetic = true so a training mixture can weight or exclude it. The
only other synthetic member of this corpus is 182 (Eyecandies); everything else is photographic.
Task & answer. Anomaly detection with defect naming. query is our own template (the source ships no
natural-language question): it names the asset and asks whether it is good or anomalous and, if anomalous,
for the defect type from that scenario's closed set. annot is plain text {good, null} / {anomalous, <defect>}.
Defect vocabularies differ per scenario, and three are effectively binary. electrical_insulator (broken),
wind_turbine (crack) and witness_mark (looseness) have exactly one defect type, so naming it adds nothing
beyond the label there; metadata.single_defect_type marks those records. The four richer scenarios are
catenary_dropper (broken / looseness / miss), nut_and_bolt (looseness / missbolt / missnut),
photovoltaic_module (broken / foreign_body / miss) and metal_welding (weld_beading / weld_pit).
Mask (deferred GT). Binary {0, 255} masks are embedded in the mask column for all 17,500 defective test
images; good images carry mask = null.
Lazy-baseline floor. The test split is exactly balanced — 17,500 good vs 17,500 anomalous — so the binary
majority floor is 50.0%, and the full {label, defect_type} floor is also 50.0% (answering {good, null}
every time). This is one of the cleanest floors in the corpus, a consequence of the synthetic design.
Provenance
Underlying dataset: MIAD (Maintenance Inspection Anomaly Detection). Upstream license: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 (non-commercial) (this card is license: other; respect the upstream terms). Converted read-only from the raw source into the unified schema; conversion code under 210/ (with publish/push_to_hf.py) in AI4Manufacturing/forge_model.
Overlap / de-duplication (§8)
No overlap with any other dataset in this corpus. ⚠ The imagery is 3D-rendered, not photographed — see the synthetic note below. Each record carries metadata.image_sha256 so overlapping images can be kept entirely on one side of a train/eval split.
- Downloads last month
- 13