Supporting project · Scientific ML engineering

Evaluation hardening planned

Product Image Classifier

A small-data image classification project being reframed around reproducible experiments, calibrated decisions, explicit limitations, and portable inference.

Engineering thesis

An ML metric is not evidence by itself.

A defensible result requires versioned data provenance, leakage-resistant splits, controlled preprocessing, seeded experiments, meaningful baselines, uncertainty, calibration, and error slices. Training and inference artifacts must remain separate and traceable.

The project is accurately scoped as classification; it does not claim object localization unless localization behavior and evaluation are implemented.

Target evidence

What the evaluation must prove

Data

Traceable experimental inputs

Provenance, licensing, split policy, preprocessing, class balance, seeds, and dataset limitations.

Evaluation

Defensible comparison

Baselines, confidence intervals, calibration, per-class errors, ablations, and reproducible commands.

Artifact

Versioned model delivery

Model and data cards, checksums, environment lock, lineage, and a distinct inference package.

Portability

CPU-first inference

A validated CPU path plus separately measured GPU support without conflating serving and training portability.

Current boundary

Historical results require revalidation.

  • No accuracy, calibration, latency, or portability claim is promoted until its methodology and reproduction path are published.
  • Repository modernization is planned; current public metadata states that status explicitly.
  • The release goal is scientific clarity, not added infrastructure for appearance.