Similar but different methods

Many people with image processing experience look at FlexInspector and say, "Pattern matching, right?
"Pattern matching, right?"
"Isn't it a comparison test?"
Many people who have experience in image processing often comment, "Isn't it pattern matching?
FlexInspector's method is different from both pattern matching and comparison checking.
These methods are,

• Variations that good products have and errors in position correction are not taken into account.
• Even if multiple good products could be registered, it would be only a few at most, which would not absorb the variation.
• The more comparables you add, the slower the speed.
• Considering by the degree of agreement (similarity), the location of the defect cannot be identified.
• There is no such "God-given goodness".

This method is not suitable for actual product inspections, such as
Experience has shown that a good registration type inspection method requires about 50 good registrations (depending on product accuracy) to achieve a level of detection that can be correlated with visual inspection.
With FlexInspector, you can register several hundred good parts or more.
This is not a loss of inspection time at all.
We are often asked the question, "Won't a large number of good registrations slow down the inspection process?" The only reason for this is that "registering a large number of items will result in more accurate judgments". However, after a certain number of registrations, it is almost ineffective.
However, FlexInspector cannot be applied when there is a large variation of good products, because the defects will be buried in the variation. For example, it is not useful for visual inspection of agricultural products.