If a supplier proposes AI-generated thermal alerts, evaluate missed events and false alerts against a defined task before accepting the feature. A striking demonstration image is insufficient evidence for automated inspection decisions.
Define what the alert is supposed to mean
| Decision item | Evidence to request |
|---|---|
| Target event | A precise description of the condition the system is intended to flag |
| Missed event | How a relevant condition that produces no alert is recorded |
| False alert | How an alert on an irrelevant condition is recorded |
| Reference decision | Who independently determines the expected result |
| Operator response | Who reviews the alert and follows the approved work procedure |
Use representative, authorized test material and retain cases that the system handles poorly as well as successful examples. Keep the software version, settings and sample selection visible. A result on selected demonstration files should not be presented as performance across every worksite or asset type.
Keep evaluation separate from deployment
Ask the responsible domain and application reviewers to set acceptance criteria and a suitable assessment plan. Do not create hazardous conditions to generate examples, invent a detection percentage or use an unvalidated alert as the sole basis for a consequential decision. Where the system’s scope is uncertain, keep it as an unresolved requirement.
The P20 Pro product information describes integrated thermal imaging. It does not establish an AI defect-detection model, a validated alert function or a missed-event rate. This guide reports no AI evaluation and makes no diagnostic or safety-critical suitability claim.
Use the feature-verification guide to separate image presentation from detection. Ask Phonemax which functions are actually delivered before requesting evidence for any proposed alert feature.
发表评论
所有评论在发布前都会经过审核。
此站点受 hCaptcha 保护，并且 hCaptcha 隐私政策和服务条款适用。