Multi-Modal Agents for Power Distribution Defect Detection: An Evaluation of Foundation Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12969v1
• Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 06:57:01 GMT
• Title: Multi-Modal Agents for Power Distribution Defect Detection: An Evaluation of Foundation Models
• Abstract summary: Power distribution network is critical to reliable electricity delivery.<n>Traditional inspection methods face limitations in semantic understanding, generalization, and closed-loop automation.<n>This paper proposes a Multi-Modal Agent framework specifically for power distribution defect detection.
• Score: 12.657204866483681
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The power distribution network is critical to reliable electricity delivery, yet traditional inspection methods face limitations in semantic understanding, generalization, and closed-loop automation. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a Multi-Modal Agent framework specifically for power distribution defect detection. Central to this study is the systematic evaluation of multimodal foundation models as unified cognitive engines. We rigorously assess their integrated performance across three critical capabilities: (1) Perception, where the model must accurately identify equipment and generate expert-level descriptions of defects; (2) Reasoning, where the model interprets visual findings to diagnose causes, assess severity, and plan maintenance strategies based on domain knowledge; and (3) Tool Usage, where the model acts as an autonomous operator to execute actions -- such as querying knowledge bases or generating work orders -- to achieve closed-loop maintenance. To support this evaluation, a domain-specific evaluation dataset and a comprehensive benchmark are developed. Experimental results demonstrate the strengths and limitations of current foundation models in these three dimensions, providing empirical evidence for deploying autonomous agents in high-stakes industrial environments.

Related papers

• Network Knowledge Prior Guided Learning for Data-Efficient Surface Defect Detection [3.467019758110102]
  This paper proposes a novel knowledge-guided loss function that seamlessly integrates model interpretability into the training process.<n>Our method operates in two phases: first, a primary classification network is trained, and its explanations, in the form of saliency maps, are generated as prior knowledge.<n>Experiments on multiple public defect datasets demonstrate that our approach consistently enhances the performance of baseline models in terms of accuracy and AP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T02:59:33Z)
• Pitfalls in Evaluating Interpretability Agents [91.49742416116635]
  We build an agentic system in which a research agent iteratively designs experiments and refines hypotheses.<n>Our work demonstrates fundamental challenges in evaluating complex automated interpretability systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-20T16:27:17Z)
• From Passive Metric to Active Signal: The Evolving Role of Uncertainty Quantification in Large Language Models [77.04403907729738]
  This survey charts the evolution of uncertainty from a passive diagnostic metric to an active control signal guiding real-time model behavior.<n>We demonstrate how uncertainty is leveraged as an active control signal across three frontiers.<n>This survey argues that mastering the new trend of uncertainty is essential for building the next generation of scalable, reliable, and trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T06:21:31Z)
• The Hierarchy of Agentic Capabilities: Evaluating Frontier Models on Realistic RL Environments [0.11586753333439907]
  We present an empirical study evaluating frontier AI models on 150 workplace tasks within a realistic e-commerce RL environment from Surge.<n>Our analysis reveals an empirically-derived emphhierarchy of agentic capabilities that models must master for real-world deployment.<n>Weaker models struggle with fundamental tool use and planning, whereas stronger models primarily fail on tasks requiring contextual inference beyond explicit instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-13T23:49:06Z)
• Demystifying deep search: a holistic evaluation with hint-free multi-hop questions and factorised metrics [89.1999907891494]
  We present WebDetective, a benchmark of hint-free multi-hop questions paired with a controlled Wikipedia sandbox.<n>Our evaluation of 25 state-of-the-art models reveals systematic weaknesses across all architectures.<n>We develop an agentic workflow, EvidenceLoop, that explicitly targets the challenges our benchmark identifies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T07:59:03Z)
• RealUnify: Do Unified Models Truly Benefit from Unification? A Comprehensive Benchmark [71.3555284685426]
  We introduce RealUnify, a benchmark designed to evaluate bidirectional capability synergy.<n>RealUnify comprises 1,000 meticulously human-annotated instances spanning 10 categories and 32 subtasks.<n>We find that current unified models still struggle to achieve effective synergy, indicating that architectural unification alone is insufficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T15:07:28Z)
• PB-IAD: Utilizing multimodal foundation models for semantic industrial anomaly detection in dynamic manufacturing environments [0.0]
  This paper presents PB-IAD (Prompt-based Industrial Anomaly Detection), a novel framework for anomaly detection.<n>It addresses three key requirements of dynamic production environments: data sparsity, agile adaptability, and domain user centricity.<n>It is benchmarked to state-of-the-art methods for anomaly detection such as PatchCore.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-20T07:53:13Z)
• Unsupervised Model Diagnosis [49.36194740479798]
  This paper proposes Unsupervised Model Diagnosis (UMO) to produce semantic counterfactual explanations without any user guidance. Our approach identifies and visualizes changes in semantics, and then matches these changes to attributes from wide-ranging text sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T17:59:03Z)
• Operationalizing Specifications, In Addition to Test Sets for Evaluating Constrained Generative Models [17.914521288548844]
  We argue that the scale of generative models could be exploited to raise the abstraction level at which evaluation itself is conducted. Our recommendations are based on leveraging specifications as a powerful instrument to evaluate generation quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-19T06:39:43Z)
• Exploring the Trade-off between Plausibility, Change Intensity and Adversarial Power in Counterfactual Explanations using Multi-objective Optimization [73.89239820192894]
  We argue that automated counterfactual generation should regard several aspects of the produced adversarial instances. We present a novel framework for the generation of counterfactual examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-20T15:02:53Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.