Explanation: The provided confidence score (0.0305) is significantly below the 0.1 threshold, meaning the object detection tool has officially failed to detect the front wheel. Therefore, according to the provided detection logic, it is classified as not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool shows an extremely low confidence level of approximately 0.018 for a zipper tag, which falls well below the detection threshold of 0.1. Visually, the central zipper hardware is hidden behind a fabric placket, confirming that no zipper tag is discernibly visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool's confidence level of approximately 0.046 is extremely low, falling well below the 0.1 threshold for a positive identification. Furthermore, visual inspection of the mechanical beam balance confirms the absence of a numerical or circular scale dial; the device relies on a simple vertical pointer and horizontal alignment to indicate equilibrium.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The model fails to detect the tuning pegs due to its low confidence score, even though the tuning pegs are clearly visible at the top of the violin's neck (the scroll area), appearing as four dark brown horizontal pegs. Therefore, based on the tool's output criteria, they are considered undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The tuning pegs (the white rectangular buttons and the geared mechanisms attached to the rollers) are clearly visible and structurally distinct on the headstock of the guitar, regardless of the low confidence score from the object detection tool.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image depicts an instrument modeled after a violin but lacking the characteristic f-holes on its soundboard. The wooden surface is continuous and solid where these apertures would normally be. This confirms the object detection tool's low confidence score, as the feature is physically absent.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image depicts a violin that lacks strings. While standard components like the pegs, fingerboard, bridge, and tailpiece are present, there are no vertical lines representing strings spanning across them. The extremely low confidence score from the object detection tool (less than 1%) confirms that no strings were detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The reflector, usually a mirror or lamp located below the stage, is not present in this photograph. There is an empty space where the light source should be attached to the base assembly.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The YOLO detection tool correctly assigned a very low confidence score to the fingerboard because the component has been digitally erased from the image. In the area where the dark fingerboard should be located, there is a distinct white void, confirming it is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a light microscope with an empty revolving nosepiece. The objective lenses, which typically screw into the holes at the base of the body tube, are missing from the device in this photo.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The stage of the microscope is visible as a flat black surface, but there are no metal clips or holders present on top of it. The low confidence score from the object detection tool further confirms that stage clips are not discernible in this image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool returned a confidence score of approximately 0.038, which is significantly below the 0.1 threshold required for detection. Visually, while a large coarse adjustment knob is prominent on the arm of this microscope, a distinct fine focus knob is not clearly discernable in the image provided.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The coarse adjustment knob is a standard component of a compound microscope, typically located on the side of the arm. However, in this specific side-view image, the arm appears smooth and lacks the large dial usually associated with coarse focus. The only knob-like structure visible is near the base for the mirror assembly. A detection confidence of approximately 0.046 reinforces that the model could not find a clear feature corresponding to a focus knob.

Answer: 2


Explanation: Despite the low confidence score from the object detection tool, the image clearly displays two open oval-shaped finger holes within the black handles of the scissors. They are distinct, unobstructed, and central to the object's design.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image depicts a mug with a flat lid placed squarely on top. Because the lid completely seals the top of the vessel, the actual rim of the mug is obscured and not visible in the frame. This is consistent with the object detection tool's failure to identify a visible rim.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object is a plain, cylindrical cup or container. All visible surfaces are smooth and uniform, with no handle, grip, or attachment points present. The low confidence detection from the tool reinforces that no such feature exists.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object shown is a stylized hair tool labeled as a 'comb' (梳子), but it only features a single pointed projection rather than a series of teeth. Because it lacks the characteristic parallel set of bristles or prongs associated with the term 'teeth' in this context, they are not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The temple arms are clearly visible extending from the frame hinges towards the back, despite being thin and casting a shadow. The automated detection likely failed due to the thin profile and low contrast with the shadow.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The alarm clock in the image features a white face that is entirely devoid of markings. While there are mechanical hands present, there are no numerals or tick marks visible on the dial, which is consistent with the extremely low confidence score from the detection tool.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While the image shows a pair of spectacles, the angle and lighting make the nose pads extremely difficult to distinguish from the frame bridge or the shadow. Given the detection confidence is significantly below the threshold of 0.1, they are considered not visible according to technical detection standards.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows an alarm clock face with a central spindle, but the hour, minute, and second hands are entirely missing. The low confidence score (0.04) from the detection tool confirms that no clock hands were actually detected, as they are not present on the dial.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image displays power strips and power plugs as separate, unconnected items. There are no electrical cords or cables visible extending from the plugs or the power strip units.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image depicts a faucet body where the operative top mechanism, such as a knob, lever, or cross-handle, is entirely absent. The top of the fixture is flat and sealed, providing no visible means of control. This supports the detection tool's finding of no identifiable handle.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While common object detection models may struggle due to the low angle or lighting, there are multiple large black rubber tires clearly visible on the lower section of the red fire engine across several axles. They are a prominent anatomical feature of the vehicle in the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image shows two power strips. While multiple sockets and the power cords are visible, the actual male plugs at the end of the cords are not within the frame or are hidden behind the devices. Therefore, a plug is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The squeeze lever is prominently located at the top of the fire extinguisher, just above the carrying handle and integrated with the discharge mechanism near the pressure gauge. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, it is clearly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The spout of the electric kettle is not visible in this image. The kettle is positioned such that the handle and main body are facing the camera, while the spout is on the opposite side, hidden from view.

Answer: 2


Explanation: A handle is clearly visible on the right side of the kettle, made of black plastic and extending from just below the lid to the base. Even if the detection software failed with low confidence, the feature is distinctly present and functional in the visual image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The object detection tool's finding of 0.005 confidence confirms that the handlebars are not detectably present. Visually, while the stem is visible above the head tube, the actual handlebar grips and horizontal tubes are missing from the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool correctly failed to identify a saddle with any certainty. Looking at the image, the bicycle is missing its seat entirely; the top of the seat tube is empty.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the crank arms extending from the chain guard, but the actual foot platforms (pedals) that should be attached to the ends of those arms are missing from the structure. This is consistent with an object detection confidence score below 0.1, indicating they are not present.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool reported a confidence level below the detection threshold (0.025 vs 0.1), which confirms that no switch is logically visible in the image. Visually, the standard placement for switches on this fan model is behind the head or on the neck, which are obscured from this frontal perspective.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool returned a confidence score of 0.018, which is well below the 0.1 threshold for detection. Additionally, visual inspection of the kettle shows no active light or distinct indicator panel visible to the naked eye.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a laptop with a flat, smooth silver surface where the keyboard would normally be located. Upon close inspection, there are no individual keys, markings, or mechanical structures visible on that panel. The AI detection confidence of 0.035 also indicates that no keyboard features were found.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a modified or broken shopping cart where the horizontal cross-bar typically used as a handle is completely missing. Only the vertical side supports remain, making the actual handle non-existent. This matches the automated detection's low confidence score.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The detected object has a confidence score of 0.0066, which is significantly below the 0.1 threshold for valid detection. Furthermore, visual analysis shows that the base of the cart ends in flat stationary support pads rather than circular rolling wheels.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The propeller is present at the front of the aircraft, appearing as a thin dark diagonal line, but it is extremely faint and blends into the shadowed parts of the engine cowling and the landing gear struts, making it difficult to detect with low contrast.

Answer: 1


Explanation: The vertical stabilizer, which is the upright fin at the rear of the aircraft (part of the tail assembly), is distinctly visible and unobstructed in this side-view profile of the plane. Despite the low confidence score from the automated tool, the structure is clearly recognizable to the human eye above the tail cone.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The horizontal stabilizer is the horizontal wing-like structure at the tail of the aircraft. In this image, despite what an automated tool may report, the part is clearly visible to the human eye at the rear of the plane's fuselage.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the front windshield and the side windows on the left are clearly visible, the windows on the opposite (right) side of the aircraft are largely obscured or only visible through the cabin, which may account for the low confidence score in detecting all windows simultaneously.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The interior view of the vehicle shows the upper windshield area and the ceiling console, but a rear-view mirror is missing from its standard mounting location. The low confidence score from the detection tool further confirms that it is not present in the scene.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the dashboard and interior of a car from the driver's perspective, but the steering wheel is conspicuously absent from the steering column. The object detection tool's confidence level of approximately 0.02 matches this observation as it falls well below the detection threshold.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The camera angle is a three-quarter view from the front-side. While the top metallic surface is visible, it is angled away from the lens such that the actual openings for the bread slots cannot be seen. The low confidence score from the detection tool (0.04) confirms that no distinct slot features are distinguishable.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The toaster shown in the image is an automatic / motorized model. On the front panel, there is a shade dial and buttons for 'Cancel' and 'Bagel', but no manual lever is present. The side panel is also visible and contains no lever. The object detection confidence of 0.049 confirms that no lever is significantly detected in the visual field.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The detection tool confidence of 0.01 is well below the 0.1 threshold, confirming that no engines are clearly identifiable in this profile view of the aircraft. From this specific angle, the engines are hidden by the fuselage and the wing's leading edges.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image depicts a United Airlines Boeing 777 that is missing its vertical stabilizer. While the horizontal stabilizers at the rear of the aircraft are clearly visible, the vertical fin is absent. The low confidence score of the detection tool (less than 0.1) confirms that a vertical stabilizer is not detected in the frame.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The horizontal stabilizer is the small wing at the rear of an aircraft. In this specific image, the angle of the plane obscures the horizontal stabilizers behind the main fuselage and tail fin. Since they cannot be seen from this perspective, they are not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While the cockpit windows of the United Airlines aircraft are physically present and visible to a human viewer at the nose of the plane, the object detection tool produced a confidence score of approximately 0.03, which falls below the specified threshold of 0.1 for detection.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows an incomplete bicycle frame assembly. While it includes the wheels, frame, and seat, the handlebars have not been attached to the vertical steering tube, making them missing from the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the vertical seat post of the bicycle, but the actual saddle (the seat component) is not attached to it. Since the part one sits on is missing, the seat itself is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While the image shows a complete bicycle, the pedals and the crank arms they would be attached to are missing from the bottom bracket area. The low confidence score from the object detection tool confirms that no pedal is identifiable in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While a green liquid residue is visible on the lid, the actual physical opening or perforation of the sip hole is obscured by the spill and the angle of the photo, making the structural opening itself not clearly identifiable.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The tool's confidence level of approximately 0.03 is well below the 0.1 threshold required for a detection to be considered valid. Visually, the central area where the logo usually resides appears blank, confirming that the logo is not discernible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The camera on this specific model of iPad is integrated into the top edge or corner. While there is a very small indentation visible on the far top-right edge, it is extremely difficult to distinguish as a camera lens without prior knowledge of the hardware design, and there is no prominent lens housing visible on the main back plate. The low confidence score from the detection tool reinforces that it is not clearly identifiable.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The iPad is positioned in a way that its bottom and top edges, where speaker grilles are typically located, are either resting on the surface or angled away from the camera. At this resolution and perspective, no individual speaker holes are discernable. This is consistent with the near-zero confidence score provided by the detection tool.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The bottom edge of the phone is visible, where the charging port is located. While the speaker grilles and headphone jack are clear, the central Lightning port is mostly obscured by shadow and the extreme mounting angle, making it very difficult to see clearly. This aligns with the computer vision tool's near-zero confidence score.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The bottom bezel of the phone, where the circular home button would be located on this model, is cropped out of the frame and obscured by the hand holding the device. Only the screen and top bezel are visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The bottom edge of the phone is visible, displaying the charging port and headphone jack. However, the specific perforations for the speaker grille are not discernable at this angle or resolution; they are either out of focus or obscured by the curvature of the frame. This aligns with the object detection tool's near-zero confidence score.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The provided image shows an iPhone from an angle where the bottom edge is partly visible. While the Lightning charging port and speaker grilles are seen at the bottom, the 3.5mm headphone jack (located at the bottom of the iPhone 5 series) is not clearly discernable due to the perspective and lighting. The object detection confidence score of approximately 0.028 confirms it is effectively undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the back of a light green iPhone held in a hand. The top section of the device, where the camera lenses would be located, is not visible in the frame. The portion shown only includes the lower Apple logo and the plain back glass.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The tool's confidence level of 0.005 is extremely low and well below the detection threshold, confirming that the Esc key is not present. On a standard keyboard layout, the Esc key should be positioned to the left of the F1 key, but in this image, that area is blank plastic; the top row begins directly with F1.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The 'Esc' key is typically located at the top-left corner of the keyboard. In this image, while the key itself is physically present and its position is clear to a human observer, the low confidence score of the detection tool indicates that the specific markings or the key's features were not clearly distinguishable by the algorithm.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While the space bar is at the bottom center of the keyboard and logically present, the extreme perspective angle and low image resolution in that specific area make the individual boundaries of the key difficult to distinguish clearly. This justifies the extremely low detection confidence and places it in the category of being present but hard to see and define.

Answer: 1


Explanation: The touchpad surface is highly integrated and color-matched with the surrounding palm rest, lacking distinct physical seams or a high-contrast border. While a faint geometric outline suggests its location, it is very difficult to see clearly, which aligns with the failure of the object detection tool to identify it with high confidence.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The Windows Start button is located in the center of the taskbar at the bottom of the screen, as is standard for Windows 11. Despite the low detection confidence reported, the icon (a square composed of four blue panes) is clearly identifiable to a human observer alongside the search bar and other application icons.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The detection tool shows a confidence score of approximately 0.02, which is significantly below the 0.1 threshold for valid detection. Visually, the laptop lid has a plain silver finish with no visible Apple logo, indicating it has been removed or edited out.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The handlebars on this Triumph Rocket III are mostly obscured behind the large twin headlights and the thick front fork tubes from this viewpoint. Only a tiny portion of the right-hand grip area might be inferred near the turn signal, but the actual handlebar structure is not clearly visible. This aligns with the object detection tool's failure to identify them (confidence below 0.1).

Answer: 2


Explanation: The tool correctly identifies that no headlight is clearly visible. Upon inspection, the headlight assembly is missing from the front forks of this motorcycle, leaving only the silver mounting bracket and the radiator visible where a headlight would typically be positioned.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The bottom of the mouse is clearly visible; however, the typical location for a sensor window (the central oval area) is a solid plastic indentation with no transparent lens or opening. Given that the image shows a physical object but lacks the actual sensor aperture, it is likely a non-functional unit or the sensor is missing, and thus not visible. This is consistent with the near-zero confidence score from the detection tool.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a partial view of a Samsung remote control. Typically, the power button on this model is located at the very top, often a red circular button. In this particular photograph, the top edge of the remote is out of frame, starting just above the number pad and 'SOURCE' button. Because the top section is not captured, the power button is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The runway markings visible include threshold stripes, touchdown zone bars, and aiming points, but there is no runway number visible. The area where a designated runway number would normally appear is empty or only contains center line stripes. The low object detection confidence score further confirms that no discernible runway number is present.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While the train is clearly on its path, the actual metal rails of the track are largely obscured by the perspective and the ballast in the foreground, and only thin parallel lines are visible further down and directly under the wheels. The extremely low confidence of the detection tool highlights that the physical rails are not prominently distinct from the surrounding gravel.

Answer: 1


Explanation: The headlights are located in the small horizontal enclosure above the nose and below the windshield, but in this image, they are completely unlit and show no visible light emission or reflection that would make them stand out. Consistent with the object detection result, they are effectively not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The Windows 7 taskbar shown in the image is missing the characteristic round 'Start' orb button on the bottom-left corner. The taskbar begins immediately with the Internet Explorer, File Explorer, and Windows Media Player icons, indicating the Start button is cropped out or absent from this specific screenshot. This confirms the object detection tool's finding that the button is effectively undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The crown of the watch is located on the side of the case, usually at the 3 o'clock position. Given the overhead camera angle and the case orientation, the crown is hidden behind the bezel and case edges. The extremely low object detection confidence score confirms it is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The model of this Amtrak locomotive (P42DC) features a recessed, wrap-around windshield design at the top of the blue-painted nose section. From this specific low-angle perspective and lighting, the glass itself is not visible to the eye, appearing only as a dark, shadowed region within the aerodynamic structure. Given that the provided object detection confidence is below the threshold of 0.1, it is considered undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image displays a stainless steel drinking fountain basin. Although a drain is a functional necessity for this object, the bottom of the bowl is rendered as a smooth, continuous surface without any visible perforation, opening, or grid for water drainage. The low confidence score from the detection tool further confirms that no distinct drain features are present in the visual representation.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The detection tool's low confidence score of approximately 0.002 supports the visual observation that the main rotor blades are missing from the image frame. While the rotor hub and mast are partially visible atop the fuselage, the actual main rotor blades are not within the photograph's field of view.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The cockpit window area is very dark and blends with the fuselage color, making it almost indistinguishable from the rest of the nose cone. Given the low confidence score from the object detection tool and the visual ambiguity, it is technically visible but very hard to identify clearly.

Answer: 1


Explanation: While the aircraft's engines are physically present in the underslung mountings on the wings, they are significantly obscured by deep shadows and the high contrast against the bright sky. The lack of discernible detail or texture, coupled with the extremely low confidence from detection tools, suggests they are not clearly visible as distinct components.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool returned a confidence score of approximately 0.048, which is below the 0.1 threshold for detection. Visual inspection confirms the engines are obstructed by the wings or outside of the frame from this specific upward viewing angle.

Answer: 2


Explanation: Although the object detection tool produced a very low confidence score, there is a distinct, small black fabric carry handle located at the very top center of the backpack where the shoulder straps originate. It is visible and identifiable by a human viewer in the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The vertical stabilizer, which is the upright fin on the tail of the aircraft, is not visible in this image. The photograph is cropped such that only the fuselage, wings, and horizontal stabilizers are shown, while the top of the tail section is outside the frame.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The side view mirrors are not present on either side of the vehicle in this image. On the driver's side (visible portion of the door/A-pillar area), the mount and mirror are completely absent, which align with the object detection confidence score below the threshold.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image captures the top and front-side surfaces of an Apple power adapter. The USB-C or MagSafe port on this specific hardware design is located on the rear or side panel facing away from the camera's perspective. It is not visible in the frame, which is consistent with the near-zero confidence score from the object detection tool.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool returns a confidence score of 0.041, which is below the 0.1 threshold for detection. Visually, while there is coffee residue in the recessed area where a sip hole would be, the lid appears to have a push-tab that has not been fully opened or removed, meaning the physical hole itself is not clearly visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a top-down view of a disposable coffee cup lid. While the lid has a recessed area where a sip hole would typically be located, the specific opening is positioned at the far edge, which is facing away from the camera or is obscured by the angle. No actual hole or opening through which liquid can be consumed is visible in this specific frame. This is consistent with the object detection tool's failure to identify a sip hole with any significant confidence.

Answer: 2


Explanation: Although the vertical metal plate contains a latch or grip mechanism on the right side of the door, based on your criteria that a confidence score below 0.1 constitutes an undetected object, the door handle is classified as not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the vertical edge of the door (the latch side) clearly. The entire visible edge is a smooth blue surface with no openings, strike plates, or metal latch bolts extending from it. The mechanism consists of handles but lacks a visible locking or latching bolt on the leading edge. This result is consistent with the object detection tool's low confidence score.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The drain is not visible in the image. It is typically located at the bottom center of the silver basin, but that area is obscured by the front lip of the fountain due to the camera angle. The low confidence score of the object detection tool confirms it is effectively undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a water bottle filling station and fountain basin, but the actual bubbler head (the spout that arcs water into the air for drinking) is physically missing from the stainless steel unit. The low confidence score from the detection tool confirms it is not present.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the side and a portion of the bottom of an earbud charging case. While speaker vents (three dots) and a microphone/indicator hole are visible on the bottom edge, the actual charging port (Lightning or USB-C) is located centrally on that bottom face, which is tilted away from the camera and is not visible in this perspective. This is consistent with the object detection tool failing to identify it.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the side and top of the object, which contains functional openings for a lanyard and speakers, but the actual charging port (located on the bottom surface) is not visible from this perspective. The extremely low confidence score from the detection tool confirms it is not present in the frame.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image features a PlayStation 4 DualShock 4 controller, which has two prominent analog thumbsticks (joysticks) positioned symmetrically at the bottom center of the controller's top face. Despite the low object detection confidence score mentioned, both joysticks are clearly identifiable and visible in the photograph.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The detected object has a confidence score far below the 0.1 threshold, and a visual inspection confirms that the logo is obscured by glare and smudge markings on the back of the device.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the camera module of a tablet clearly through its transparent protective case. The camera lens and a small sensor hole are distinctly visible in the upper-left corner area, making the hardware identifiable to the human eye despite any automated detection scores.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image displays the iPad lock screen. While the time is clearly visible, the status bar area normally containing the battery indicator is empty or obscured in this view, and no numerical percentage is shown anywhere on the display. This aligns with the detection tool failing to find the element.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool yielded a confidence score of approximately 0.045, which is well below the threshold of 0.1 for a detection to be considered valid. Visually, the standard three-pin Smart Connector interface is not discernible on the visible portions of the device's rear or edges, likely being obscured by the protective case.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the back of an iPhone and a pair of AirPods. Looking at the back of the phone, there is no camera lens or bump visible in the top-left corner where it would typically be located; the surface appears entirely flat and uniform. This is consistent with the automated detection providing a sub-threshold confidence score, effectively meaning no camera is detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The bottom edge of the device is shown, revealing the headphone jack, microphone, and charging port. However, the speaker grille, which would normally be located to the right of the charging port on this iPhone model, is out of the frame and not visible. The detection tool properly reflects this with a confidence score below the detection threshold.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The space bar is a prominent feature on the keyboard, located in its standard position at the bottom of the alphanumeric section. It is clearly visible and identifiable despite the orientation of the image. The low confidence score from the detection tool likely stems from the vertical orientation of the keyboard in the frame rather than a lack of visual evidence.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The touchpad area (trackpad) of the laptop is fully visible and occupies the central lower section of the device's base. While the dark finish of the laptop causes it to blend in, its distinct rectangular outline and texture difference below the keyboard make it clearly identifiable to a human observer despite the low detection score from the tool.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image shows the bottom side of a MacBook Pro. While the circular indentations for the rubber feet are clearly visible near the corners, the actual rubber feet themselves are missing from these recesses. Therefore, rubber feet are not present in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The detection tool confidence of 1.5% confirms that the arrow keys are not machine-detectable in this image. To the human eye, the lower-right area of the keyboard where the arrow keys belong is obscured by heavy glare and deep shadows, making it impossible to identify individual key shapes or markings.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While typical circular headlight housings are integrated into the front of this D19E model locomotive, they are not currently illuminated and are somewhat obscured by the soft focus and composition of the image. Based on the undetected status from the object detection tool, they are technically not visible as active light sources.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The driver's front windshields on the blue nose of the Amtrak locomotive are clearly visible in the foreground, directly below the number 78 and above the headlights. Despite low confidence from an automated tool, they are distinct architectural features of the train visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The detection tool failed because it only captured a partial view of the metallic bars near the instrument cluster from a rear-angle perspective, leading to a very low confidence score below the visibility threshold.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image provides a close-up view of the bottom edge and a portion of the screen of a smartphone. The front bezel area where a home button would typically be located is not visible in this perspective, and the low confidence score from the detection tool confirms that no such feature is present in the frame.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a computer mouse that has a significant recession or cavity where a scroll wheel should be. There is no physical wheel protruding or visible within that slot, confirming that the component is missing from this specific device. This aligns with the object detection tool's failure to find the object.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a NEMA 6-20R duplex outlet. While the hot and neutral slots are clearly visible, the bottom portion of each receptacle where the ground pin hole would be located is either obscured by the angle or missing from the visible slots in this specific photo frame. Therefore, the ground pin holes are not visible in the image. This is consistent with the object detection tool returning a confidence score well below the threshold.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The detected confidence score (0.0077) is extremely low and well below the detection threshold, which confirms the initial visual assessment. This is a screwless wall plate design where the mounting screws are concealed behind a snap-on cover.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The outlet cover plate shown in the image is a screwless design, which snaps onto a sub-plate. There are no visible fastener screws on the front surface of the wall plate, consistent with the detection tool's near-zero confidence score.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The camera angle captures the sink basin and the faucet, but the drain opening, usually located at the bottom-center or rear-center, is outside the field of view or obscured by shadows and reflection at the bottom edge.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the entire interior of the sink basin. There is no overflow hole present on the front, back, or side walls of the basin. The object detection confidence of 0.037 further confirms that there is no such feature visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The railroad track is directly visible beneath the front of the train and along its side, where the metal rails and the gravel ballast are clearly discernible even though the train covers much of the path.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly displays both small front caster wheels located at the base of the wheelchair structure. One is in the direct foreground and the other is slightly behind it, both unobstructed and in focus.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool produced a low confidence score, there is a graduated linear scale located on the horizontal beam of the balance. This scale is marked with numbers from 0 to 10 and serves the purpose of a ruler for measuring specific mass increments by positioning the sliding weight (rider). It is clearly visible to a human observer at the center of the device layout.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the pressure gauge is present and visible, the needle itself is very small and lacks strong contrast against the gauge face, causing the automated detection tool to fail. Human inspection shows it is clearly visible pointing to the green section.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While there is a visible zipper slider and pull at the top of the center-front opening, it is quite small and lacks a long fabric distal 'tag' or puller cord. Based on the extremely low detection confidence provided (which falls below the threshold), the specific feature of a 'zipper tag' is not sufficiently prominent or clearly defined in this image to be considered detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool's low confidence score is likely due to the specific lighting or background extraction in the image, as the f-holes are structurally essential and aesthetically distinct features of the violin shown. From a human perspective, both f-holes are clearly visible, sharply defined, and located in their standard position on the instrument's top plate.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image depicts a mechanical beam balance. It utilizes a central pointer and a horizontal graduated scale with a sliding weight (rider) to measure mass, rather than a circular or semi-circular dial typically found on spring scales. The low confidence score from the detection tool further confirms that no standard dial is present.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image clearly displays the headstock of a classical guitar, which includes six tuning pegs (three on each side) designed for string adjustment. These components are distinct and sharply in focus at the top of the neck, making them easily identifiable despite the low confidence score from the object detection tool.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the provided confidence score is extremely low, visual inspection of the image clearly shows four tuning pegs located at the scroll of the violin, two on each side. Their shape, brown color, and position are distinctly identifiable against the white background.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The fingerboard is the long black surface located directly under the strings on the neck of the violin. Despite the low confidence from the object detection tool, it is visually distinct and prominent in the center of the image. Its dark color contrasts sharply with the orange-brown body of the violin, making it clearly identifiable to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool returned a very low confidence score, a visual inspection by a human observer confirms that the four strings are clearly visible as distinct vertical lines extending from the pegbox to the tailpiece across the body of the violin.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly displays a revolving nosepiece with at least three objective lenses mounted on it. These lenses are positioned directly above the stage and are a fundamental, high-contrast part of the microscope's structure shown in this profile view. Despite any low-confidence output from automated detection tools, they are unmistakable to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the machine learning model failed to detect it with high confidence (likely because it is viewed from a side-on angle), to a human observer, the mirror/reflector unit at the bottom of the microscope used for gathering light is clearly identifiable and visible.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool produced a low confidence score, a visual inspection of the image clearly shows the large coarse focus knob on the side of the microscope arm used for initial focusing. The tool's failure to detect it with high confidence does not change the fact that it is clearly present in the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While an automated tool might struggle with detection due to scale or orientation, the visual evidence is clear. In the image, directly below the larger coarse focus knob, there is a distinct, smaller secondary knob specifically designed for fine adjustments. This is a standard anatomical feature of this microscope model and is clearly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows two silver metallic stage clips mounted on top of the black stage platform, used to secure a slide for viewing. These components are well-lit and unobstructed.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Despite the object detection tool's low confidence score, human visual inspection confirms that both finger holes of the scissors are clearly defined, unobstructed, and positioned prominently at the bottom of the tool handles.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The tool failed to detect the handle due to its low confidence score (less than 0.1), likely because the handle's matte texture and color match the body of the mug, despite it being clearly visible to a human observer.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to identify the teeth because it likely lacks the specific context of 'comb teeth.' However, in common language and visual identification, the individual parallel bristles or 'teeth' of the comb are the primary subject of the upper half of the image and are unmistakably clear.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The rim is clearly visible at the top of the mug, shown from a slight high-angle perspective that reveals the thickness and the inner circumference of the vessel's top edge. Although a detection tool may have failed to identify it with high confidence, it is easily discernible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The temple arms (the long parts of the frames that extend over the ears) are clearly visible in the image. One is seen on the left side extending upwards, and the other is on the right side extending downwards, both ending with black-colored tips. They are distinct from the lenses and rims.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to reach the confidence threshold, human observation clearly identifies an hour hand, a minute hand, and a thin red second hand on the white face of the alarm clock. They are high-contrast and unobstructed.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Despite the object detection tool's low confidence score, a visual inspection of the image clearly reveals the nose pads positioned on the inner rims of the glasses near the bridge. They are translucent, teardrop-shaped components attached to the frame by thin metal arms.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the user reports low confidence from an automated tool, human visual inspection confirms that the numbers 1 through 12 are clearly printed on the clock face in a high-contrast black font on a white background, making them instantly recognizable.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image prominently features two long white power cords attached to each power strip, connecting the power boards to their respective electrical plugs. These are clearly distinguishable against the background despite the low confidence score from the detection tool.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection confidence is extremely low, human visual inspection confirms the presence of a cross-shaped handle at the top of the faucet. It is clearly rendered as a structural component of the fixture, used to control water flow. The low confidence score may be due to the handle's specific antique shape or orientation relative to common training data.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image displays two power boards, and at the end of each cord, the power plug is clearly visible. On the left side, the prongs of one plug are pointed towards the left edge, and on the right side, the face of another plug is clearly seen. Therefore, the plugs are distinct and not hidden.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows a fire engine with multiple black rubber tires visible at the base of the vehicle, particularly those on the side facing the viewer. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, they are visually distinct and unmistakable to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The squeeze lever is the top part of the handle assembly located above the carrying handle and below the pressure gauge. In the provided image, it is clearly visible as the upper black metal lever designed to be pressed down to activate the fire extinguisher. The AI detection's low confidence does not reflect the actual visual clarity of the object in the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly displays a stainless steel electric kettle. On the left side of the main body, there is a distinct, prominent triangular spout for pouring water. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, the object is fully visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows an electric kettle with a large, prominent black plastic handle on the right side, designed for lifting and pouring. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, it is visually unmistakable to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The handlebars are a prominent and clearly visible feature of the bicycle, located at the front with chrome finish and light-colored grips. Despite low machine confidence, they are unmistakable to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool produced a low confidence score, there is a clear, red oval-shaped power indicator light located on the front of the black base directly beneath the 'Honeyson' logo. It is visually distinct and typical for this appliance design.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool produced a low confidence score, a human observer can clearly identify the brown leather saddle mounted on top of the bicycle frame. It is a large, distinct feature of the object shown in center-left of the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The model's low confidence score is likely due to the pedals being rendered at an angle and their dark color against the white background. However, from a human perspective, the right pedal is clearly visible at the bottom of the crank, and the left pedal is visible extending above the chain guard near the frame.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The controls for the fan are located on the central console below the fan head. Although the small individual buttons are visible, at this scale they might not provide enough distinct features for an automated detector to recognize them with high confidence, especially if it's looking for a traditional wall switch or a larger toggle. However, to a human eye, the interactive buttons are clearly present.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The keyboard is a central part of the image, clearly visible with distinct black keys arranged on the laptop's lower chassis. The low confidence score from the object detection tool is likely due to an algorithmic error rather than a lack of visual clarity in the image itself.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly displays four functional black caster wheels attached to the base of the shopping cart's lime-green frame, and they are distinct from the background.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The model's low confidence score is likely due to the handle being composed of multiple parts (green plastic ends and a white grip) which can be difficult for standard detectors to group as a single object, but to a human observer, the handle is clearly visible and unobstructed at the top of the cart structure.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to identify it due to its low confidence threshold, the propeller is distinctly present at the nose of the plane. Its presence is marked by red protective covers on the blades, which are clearly distinguishable against the background and the aircraft body.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The object detection tool was unable to reliably identify any windows, as its confidence level of 0.03476 is below the threshold of 0.1 for detection. Visually, only the left-side windows and front windshield are visible, while all others are obscured by the aircraft's body and camera angle.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to identify the vertical stabilizer likely due to its integration with the overall tail assembly or the specific angle and markings. However, to a human observer, the vertical stabilizer is clearly visible as the large upright fin at the rear of the airplane, extending upwards from the fuselage and bearing the green and blue stripe design.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The model fails to detect the horizontal stabilizer because it is viewed from a side-on angle where it appears as a thin horizontal line, making it difficult for standard detection algorithms to distinguish from other structural components despite being clearly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: A rear-view mirror is clearly visible at the top center of the windshield, reflecting the landscape behind the car. Despite the low confidence score from the object detection tool, it is visually prominent to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image depicts the interior of a car where a complete steering wheel is located in front of the driver's seat on the left. It is a large, central element of the foreground and is clearly visible despite any automated detection scores.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Although the tool provided low confidence, multiple bread slots are clearly visible at the top of the toaster in the provided image. These two openings are designed specifically for holding bread slices and are not obscured or difficult to identify.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to identify it with high confidence, a human viewer can clearly see a black lever located within a vertical slot on the front of the toaster, which is used to operate the device. It is a prominent functional component of the appliance shown in the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly displays a Boeing 777-222(ER) aircraft where at least one engine is prominently visible under the wing. Despite the low confidence score from the object detection tool, the engine is large, well-lit, and unmistakably present in the center of the aircraft's profile.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The object detection tool's low confidence score is likely due to an algorithmic error or noise in the specific model used, as the vertical stabilizer is clearly identifiable to the human eye. It is the large blue upright surface at the rear of the aircraft featuring the United logo, which is well-lit and unobstructed.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The tool's report of a horizontal stabilizer with a confidence of 0.03381347217173702 means it has not been detected. Since detection failed, it is considered not visible according to the tool's performance.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The cockpit windows are located at the front of the aircraft fuselage, above the nose. Despite the low confidence score from the object detection tool, the dark glass panes of the flight deck are clearly identifiable to the human eye in the original image under the clear lighting conditions.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the user's object detection tool reported extremely low confidence, a human inspection clearly identifies the pedal. The bicycle's right pedal is fully visible, located at the end of the crank arm near the bottom center of the image, positioned below the chain stay.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The handlebar is clearly visible at the top of the bike, extending horizontally from the stem with visible black grips and control cables, making it a prominent feature of the bicycle. The low confidence score from the detection tool is likely an error in its processing.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The seat, or saddle, is a prominent component of the bicycle, located at the top of the seat post. It is clearly visible against the white background in the upper central portion of the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The sip hole is clearly visible as an oval opening on the front edge of the white lid, highlighted further by a green beverage stain around its perimeter.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the camera lens is physically present in the top-left corner of the iPad's back surface, the detection tool's extremely low confidence score (0.044) is below the detection threshold, technically rendering it 'not visible' or 'undetected' by the automated system's standards despite being perceptible to a human.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool's confidence score of 0.01 is significantly below the 0.1 threshold for detection, meaning the software failed to reliably identify speaker holes in this specific image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: Despite the tool's low confidence score, the Apple logo is centrally positioned and clearly discernible as a dark silhouette against the light silver finish of the device. There are no obstructions or lighting issues that prevent its identification.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the bottom edge of the device is visible, the angle and lighting make the internal cavity of the charging port appear as a dark, indistinct silhouette. The extremely low confidence score (0.0038) from the detection tool confirms that the specific features of a charging port are not clearly discernable from this perspective.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While computer vision confidence may be low due to the angle and focus, the speaker holes are clearly identifiable to the human eye as the rows of circular perforations located on the bottom edge of the device, on either side of the Lightning port.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The headphone jack is clearly visible on the bottom left side of the device, represented by the circular hole adjacent to the speaker grille. While an automated tool may have failed to detect it with high confidence due to the perspective angle and shading, it is distinctly identifiable to the human eye as a physical feature of the hardware.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to identify it due to low confidence, the human eye can clearly observe the physical home button. It is the distinct white circular button with a gray square icon located at the bottom center of the white iPhone frame.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Despite the tool's low confidence score, a camera lens is explicitly visible to the human eye in the upper-left corner on the back of the iPad. It exhibits the standard physical characteristics of a tablet camera module, including the lens aperture and flash assembly.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The tool failed to detect the 'Esc' key despite its clear visibility. The 'Esc' key is located at the top-left corner of the keyboard, and its label is distinctly printed and easily readable in the provided image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The space bar is clearly visible in the image. It is the wide rectangular key located at the bottom center of the keyboard, as is standard for this laptop's layout. Despite the low object detection confidence score mentioned, it is visually identifiable without difficulty.

Answer: 0


Explanation: A prominent rectangular touchpad is located on the lower half of the laptop base, centered below the keyboard. It is clearly defined by its borders and texture against the rest of the silver-blue chassis.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the Escape key is logically positioned in the far top-left corner of the keyboard deck and its shape is visible, the perspective and image resolution make the label 'Esc' difficult to read clearly. Therefore, it is detectable as a key but not as distinctly identifiable by text as a high-confidence object detector might require.

Answer: 1


Explanation: While a human observer can clearly see the white Apple logo on the laptop lid due to its distinct shape and contrast, the object detection tool failed to meet the confidence threshold, likely due to the low-contrast lighting or angled perspective of the logo in this specific image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: While a Windows Start button exists on the taskbar, it is extremely small within the overall image resolution and lacks high-contrast detail, making it difficult for automated systems to detect reliably. However, to a human eye, the characteristic four-pane blue Windows logo is clearly identifiable in its standard position on the taskbar.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool produced a very low confidence score, a visual inspection of the image clearly shows the handlebar at the top front of the motorcycle, including the metal bars and the hand grips. Technical detection failures do not override the clear visual presence of the component.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The provided confidence score is extremely low (less than 1%), which falls below the detection threshold. However, visual inspection of the image clearly shows two prominent, chrome-finished circular headlights at the front of the motorcycle. Since they are physically present and unmistakable, they would be marked as clearly visible regardless of a specific tool's low confidence score.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The bottom of the computer mouse is clearly shown, and the central oval-shaped opening for the optical sensor (the sensor window) is plainly visible to the human eye, even if the automated tool failed to detect it with high confidence.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The runway number '30' and the designator 'R' are prominently displayed in large white paint in the center of the runway's threshold area. The markings are sharp, high-contrast, and occupy a significant portion of the foreground, making them clearly visible to the human eye despite the low confidence score from the automated tool.

Answer: 0


Explanation: A railroad track is prominently displayed in the foreground and extending into the background, consisting of parallel steel rails, wooden ties, and a gravel ballast bed. It is a main focal point of the image alongside the train.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The power button is the distinctive bright red button located at the top right of the remote control. It is clearly visible to the human eye due to its high color contrast and standard power icon, despite any low confidence scores from automated object detection tools.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to identify them due to a low confidence score, the headlights are visually unmistakable in the image. There is a primary dual-sealed beam headlight located centrally on the nose above the coupler, and two auxiliary ditch lights located slightly lower and further out on either side of the nose.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Although the object detection tool failed to reach the confidence threshold, the front windshield of the Amtrak locomotive is clearly visible in the image, providing an unobstructed view into the driver's cab area.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The Start button is a clearly identifiable element of the Windows 7 user interface, located prominently in the bottom-left corner of the taskbar. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, it is easily visible to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The crown is a prominent physical component of this watch model, located on the right side of the case at the 3 o'clock position. Regardless of the automated tool's low confidence score, it is distinctly visible to the human eye as an protruding octagonal-shaped element used for adjustment.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the user's detection tool failed to identify them, the visual evidence shows a central drain cover at the bottom of the basin with clearly defined circular openings designed for water drainage. These holes are structurally distinct and visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The model's failure to detect the main rotor is likely due to the extreme scale of the object; the blades span almost the entire width of the image, which can confuse detection algorithms expecting more contained features, even though the component is visually unmistakable to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The cockpit windows are located at the front of the aircraft fuselage, above the nose. In this head-on view, the distinct panes of the flight deck windows are clearly visible to the human eye, even if an automated tool failed to reach its detection threshold. The light and shape provide enough contrast against the white upper fuselage for a definitive identification.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool produced a very low confidence score, there are two large jet engines clearly mounted under the wings of the airplane, which are easily identifiable to a human observer due to their distinct shape and position.

Answer: 2


Explanation: In the provided image, the internal components of the engine are not visible, but the external engine nacelles (casings) mounted under the wings are clearly visible as distinct structures from this perspective.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The vertical stabilizer, identified by the blue tail fin with the United gold globe logo at the rear of the aircraft, is large and clearly visible against the sky, making it easily identifiable even if an automated tool returned a low confidence score.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to identify the top lift handle due to its low confidence score (well below the 0.1 threshold). However, upon manual inspection of the image, the top lift handle is clearly visible at the top of the backpack, featuring a thick, contoured plastic grip with the 'SWISS GEAR' logo clearly displayed on it.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Despite the low confidence score from the object detection tool, the side-view mirror is clearly visible to the human eye. It is located on the right side of the image (the car's left side), attached to the door, and painted in the same red color as the bodywork. Its reflective surface and distinct shape are unmistakable against the background.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Although the automated tool had extremely low confidence, a human observer can clearly identify a USB-C port on the bottom-front edge of the white adapter block. It exhibits the characteristic oval shape and internal connector pin substrate of a standard USB-C female port.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to identify it due to its low confidence threshold, the human eye can clearly see a distinct oval-shaped sip hole on the left side of the cup lid's recessed area, marked by coffee stains.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to identify it due to its low confidence threshold, a human observer can clearly see the oval sip hole at the bottom of the recessed area on the lid, marked by brown coffee staining around the edges.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The latch bolt is retracted into the door lock assembly. While the rectangular opening and the faceplate where the bolt would emerge are visible, the actual bolt mechanism is not protruding, meaning it is not visible in the frame. This low confidence detection is likely a false positive based on the faceplate opening.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool's low confidence score is incorrect. A silver metal lever-style door handle is clearly visible on the right side of the gray door, attached to a vertical backplate with a sensor.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, the drain is clearly visible to the human eye. It is the slotted circular opening located on the left side of the stainless steel basin, designed to collect water overflow from the fountain nozzle.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The model's low confidence score is likely due to the tan-colored hygienic guard on top of the nozzle being mistaken for something else. However, the bubbler assembly is clearly positioned on the front-right of the stainless steel basin, making it fully visible to a human viewer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows the bottom of a white earbud charging case. Centered on the bottom surface is an unobstructed, dark charging port (appearing to be USB-C or Lightning). Despite the low confidence from the automated detection tool, the port is vividly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool produced a very low confidence score, the charging port is prominently displayed in the center of the bottom edge of the device, making it clearly identifiable to a human viewer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The Apple logo is clearly visible in the center of the iPad's back, regardless of the low confidence score from an automated detection tool.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly displays a DualShock 4 controller, which features two prominent analog joysticks located symmetrically in the center. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, they are clearly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: A circular camera lens is clearly visible on the top-left corner of the back of the tablet. Despite the low confidence of the detection tool, it is visually distinct and prominent to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The battery percentage is clearly visible in the top right corner of the iPad screen, explicitly displaying '17%' next to the battery icon.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While an automated tool might struggle with the low contrast or reflections, three distinct circular metallic contacts are clearly visible in a horizontal line near the bottom edge of the device, matching the standard design of the Smart Connector.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to identify the camera, but human observation clearly shows a dual-lens camera module located at the top left on the back of the silver iPhone.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool had low confidence, the image clearly shows the speaker grilles, which are the series of small holes located on the bottom right edge of the device next to the charging port. They are sharply in focus and easily identifiable.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The space bar is prominently positioned as the longest horizontal key at the bottom center of the keyboard's main section. Despite the low object detection confidence score mentioned, it is high-contrast, fully in-frame, and unmistakable to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows a large, dark gray rectangular touchpad positioned centrally below the keyboard on the laptop surface, occupying a significant portion of the lower chassis. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, it is easily identifiable to the human eye due to the contrast and clear outlined edges against the surrounding palm rest.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to reach a confidence threshold, human observation clearly identifies four distinct circular rubber feet located near the corners of the MacBook Pro's bottom case.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows the train with its front lights illuminated. There are two visible yellow headlight beams on the front of the locomotive (D19E-936), making them distinct and easy to see despite the AI confidence level provided.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While an automated tool may have failed to detect them, the arrow keys (Up, Down, Left, Right) are distinctly visible to the human eye in the bottom-right corner of the keyboard layout.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While an automated tool may have failed to detect them, the human eye can clearly identify the two large cab windshields at the front of the Amtrak locomotive number 78. These windows, used by the driver to see the track ahead, are prominently featured in the lower center of the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to find the home button with high confidence, a manual visual inspection shows that a clear, circular home button is physically present and easily identifiable on the white bezel below the screen.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The handlebars are visible at the very front of the motorcycle, positioned behind the headlight area and around the twin instrument gauges. Although they are partially obscured by the angle of the motorcycle, the structural elements of the left and right handgrips and their connection to the fork are clearly discernible to a human observer.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The scrolling wheel is centrally located at the top front of the mouse, between the primary buttons. It has a distinct raised, rounded texture compared to the smooth plastic casing of the mouse body. Despite the low confidence score from the detection tool, it is explicitly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows a standard NEMA 5-20R duplex electrical outlet. Each of the two sockets clearly displays the D-shaped opening dedicated for a ground pin, located symmetrically below the two main power slots. The lighting and angle provide a clear view of these features, making them easily identifiable to the human eye regardless of low confidence scores from automated object detection tools.

Answer: 0


Explanation: Despite the object detection tool's low confidence score, there are two standard slotted screws clearly visible on the faceplate (one at the top and one at the bottom). These are distinct and identifiable features of a standard electrical outlet installation.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image clearly shows two flathead screws securing the white wall plate to the electrical box, located at the top and bottom center of the plate respectively. Their shape and function are distinct and easily identifiable.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed to identify it, the drain hole is very easy for a human observer to see. It is the large circular feature positioned in the center of the sink, featuring a metallic finish and a grate with several small openings.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The image shows two distinct, dark oval openings positioned near the upper rim of the sink bowl, which are typical overflow drainage holes. Although the automated detection confidence was low, they are clearly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 0


Explanation: While the object detection tool failed with very low confidence, human observation clearly shows the railway tracks and concrete sleepers directly beneath and to the right of the train, extending across the bottom right of the frame.

Answer: 0


ruler

Answer: 2

Explanation: The object detection tool did not detect a ruler with a confidence level above 0.1, indicating that it is not visible in the image.


Explanation: The object detection tool found the pressure gauge needle with a very low confidence of 0.04764436962945334, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it is likely not detected. Therefore, the pressure gauge needle is not visible or is hard to see in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a zipper tag with a very low confidence level of 0.03739518322866773, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, suggesting that the zipper tag is likely not visible or is very hard to detect in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified a 'front wheel' with a very low confidence level of 0.012086486073361264. This confidence level is significantly less than the threshold of 0.1, indicating that the detection is not reliable and effectively means the front wheel is undetected. Therefore, based on the object detection tool's output, it is reasonable to conclude that the front wheel is not visible or not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a dial with a very low confidence level of 0.03241649294156545, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it was not detected. Therefore, there is no visible dial in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows a guitar with a headstock that has tuning pegs. However, upon closer inspection using an object detection tool, the confidence level for detecting the tuning peg is very low (0.010680974173052367), indicating that it is not clearly visible or detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the tuning pegs with a very low confidence level of 0.02654680620428232, which is less than the threshold of 0.1 for detection. This implies that the tool was unable to detect the tuning pegs with any degree of certainty.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the fingerboard with a very low confidence level of 0.04670134712712291, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, suggesting that the fingerboard is not clearly visible or is difficult to detect in the image. Given this low confidence level, it can be inferred that the fingerboard is either not visible or hard to see.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool was used to locate the objective lens in the image. The tool reported a confidence level of 0.019309392372318088, which is below the threshold of 0.1, indicating that the objective lens was not detected with sufficient confidence.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified a reflector with a very low confidence score of 0.0277, which is less than the threshold of 0.1 for detection. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection of a reflector in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level (0.017091034938938984) in detecting the strings, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool was unable to detect the strings with any degree of certainty. Therefore, it can be concluded that the strings are not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level (0.04497480846528165) in identifying the coarse focus knob, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool did not detect the coarse focus knob with sufficient confidence.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has detected the stage clip with a very low confidence score of 0.003525792420941271, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the model is not confident in its detection and effectively considers it as undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The confidence level of the object detection tool for identifying a 'finger hole' is 0.036978781935487426, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool did not detect the finger hole with sufficient confidence. However, upon visually inspecting the image, it is evident that there are two circular openings in the handles of the scissors, which are typically referred to as finger holes. Despite the low confidence detection, the finger holes are actually visible to the naked eye.

Answer: 1


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level (4.421899954420994e-06) for detecting teeth in the image, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it is not confident in its detection. However, upon visual inspection, there is one tooth visible on the underside of the comb.

Answer: 1


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level (0.024) for detecting the fine focus knob, which indicates that it is likely not present or not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to detect the rim with a confidence level above 0.1, indicating that it is not clearly visible or detectable. However, based on the image, the rim is visible but may be hard to see due to its subtle appearance or the lighting conditions.

Answer: 1


Explanation: The object detection tool has searched for a handle in the image but found it with a very low confidence level of 0.04237474953192635, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool did not detect a handle with any significant certainty. Therefore, the absence of a visible handle is supported by both visual inspection and the object detection tool's result.

Answer: 2


Explanation: Given that the confidence level of the object detection tool is less than 0.1, it indicates that the temple arm was not detected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the temple arm is considered not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level of 0.04324473891427738 for detecting the nose pad, which indicates that it is highly unlikely to be present or visible in the image. Therefore, the nose pad is considered undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to detect dial numbers with a confidence level of 0.046006505538966014, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool was unable to identify any dial numbers on the clock face.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found a clock hand with a confidence level of 0.04600804085341798, which is less than 0.1. According to the given criteria, a confidence level less than 0.1 means the object is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the clock hand is not considered detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a 'plug' with a very low confidence score of 0.022, which is less than 0.1, indicating that the plug is likely not detected or visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a handle with a very low confidence level of 0.021716246833435954, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it is not detected. Therefore, the handle is not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified a spout with a very low confidence level of 0.025916207299932433, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the spout is not reliably detected and is considered not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a tire with a very low confidence level of 0.049309970836569066, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it is likely not detected correctly. However, upon examining the image, we can see that there are indeed tires visible on the fire engine.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified a 'squeeze lever' with a confidence level of 0.03681671351829965, which is below the threshold of 0.1 for detection. This indicates that the tool did not confidently detect a squeeze lever in the image. Therefore, based on the tool's output, it is considered that the squeeze lever is not visible or not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found a handle with a very low confidence score of 0.0347, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, and it is likely that the handle is not clearly visible or is not detected.

Answer: 1


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level of 0.027249829587368747 for detecting a pedal, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the pedal is not reliably detected, suggesting it is either not visible or very hard to see in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the handlebar with a very low confidence level of 0.027606477262483678, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it is not reliably detected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the handlebar is considered not visible or not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a saddle with a very low confidence level of 0.0407871913473593, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the saddle is not reliably detected in the image. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the saddle is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found a switch with a very low confidence level of 0.014664230892527398, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection and effectively considers it as undetected. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is no visible switch in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found a 'keyboard' with a very low confidence level of 0.024578702395012655, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool is highly uncertain about the presence of a keyboard in the image. Therefore, it can be concluded that the keyboard is not visible or detected in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found an indicator light with a very low confidence score of 0.013583509877554162, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning the indicator light is not detected or visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a handle with a very low confidence score of 0.02317352999415756, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the handle is not reliably detected, suggesting it is either not visible or very hard to see.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a 'wheel' with a very low confidence level of 0.043447749227248825, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool did not confidently detect any wheels in the image. Therefore, it can be concluded that there are no wheels visible in the image according to the detection results.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified a propeller with a very low confidence level of 0.026890394469446577, which is less than 0.1. This suggests that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning it is undetected. However, upon visual inspection of the image, the propeller is clearly visible to the human eye.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has been used to analyze the image, and it has reported a confidence level of 0.026036077903124007 for the presence of a vertical stabilizer. Since this confidence level is less than 0.1, it is considered that the vertical stabilizer is undetected. Therefore, the correct answer is that the vertical stabilizer is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The confidence level of the object detection tool is 0.0034418607406999538, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection of the windows, effectively meaning they are not detected or visible according to the tool's criteria. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the windows are not considered visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found the horizontal stabilizer with a very low confidence of 0.0036277326371002006, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the horizontal stabilizer is not reliably detected, meaning it is either not visible or very hard to see.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The confidence level of the object detection tool for identifying the rear-view mirror is 0.03315379876541408, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool considers the rear-view mirror to be undetected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the rear-view mirror is not visible or is not detected with sufficient confidence.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found the bread slot with a very low confidence of 0.016, which is less than the threshold of 0.1, indicating that it is not reliably detected. Therefore, the bread slot is not visible according to the detection tool's output.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a steering wheel with a very low confidence level of 0.0368, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the steering wheel is not reliably detected, suggesting it is either not visible or very hard to see.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found a 'lever' with a very low confidence level of 0.008575126584131537, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is highly uncertain about the presence of a lever in the image. In fact, it is considered undetected according to the given threshold.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found an 'engine' with a very low confidence score of 0.015366061613893695, which is less than the threshold of 0.1 for detection. This implies that the tool did not confidently detect an engine in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the horizontal stabilizer with a very low confidence level of 0.03405398816233939, which is less than 0.1. According to the given criteria, a confidence level less than 0.1 means the object is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the horizontal stabilizer is not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a 'handlebar' with a very low confidence score of 0.007360197812308589, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool did not detect the handlebar with sufficient confidence to consider it a valid detection. Therefore, based on the object detection tool's output, it is reasonable to conclude that the handlebar is not visible or is not detectable in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found the cockpit window with a very low confidence score of 0.01180547356387368, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the detection is not reliable and can be considered as undetected. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the cockpit window is not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a seat with a very low confidence score of 0.0033193296691817033, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool was unable to detect a seat with any significant confidence. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is no seat visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found an 'Apple logo' with a very low confidence level of 0.019, which is less than the threshold of 0.1 for detection. This indicates that the tool did not confidently detect an Apple logo.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to detect the pedal with a high confidence level, indicating that it is not visible or is very hard to see in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the sip hole with a very low confidence level of 0.028689902840907056, which is less than 0.1. According to the given criteria, a confidence level less than 0.1 indicates that the sip hole is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the sip hole is not effectively visible or detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The confidence level of detecting speaker holes is 0.0071307699289215876, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the object detection tool did not confidently identify speaker holes in the image. Therefore, it can be concluded that speaker holes are not visible or are not detectable with confidence in the given image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level of 0.020129370225034707 for detecting a camera, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning the camera is not detected or visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to detect the charging port with a confidence level above 0.1, indicating that it is not visible or is very hard to detect in the given image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the headphone jack with a very low confidence level of 0.018999437081216892, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning it did not detect the headphone jack. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the headphone jack is considered not visible or detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has detected the home button with a very low confidence of 0.04756517886124532, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the home button is not reliably detected and can be considered not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level (0.0156) for detecting speaker holes, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool is unable to detect the speaker holes with certainty. Therefore, based on the tool's output, it can be considered that the speaker holes are not visible or detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The image shows the back of an iPhone. Using an object detection tool, the confidence level for detecting a camera is 0.04083631518850971, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the camera is not detected or is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the low confidence level from the object detection tool, it can be concluded that the camera is not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found the 'Esc' key with a very low confidence level of 0.0342102081899808, which is less than 0.1. According to the given criteria, a confidence level less than 0.1 means the object is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the 'Esc' key is not effectively detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found the 'Esc' key with a confidence level of 0.024223341004569472, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the 'Esc' key was not detected with sufficient confidence to be considered visible. Therefore, it is not visible according to the detection results.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found the space bar with a very low confidence of 0.01225449466797851, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the space bar is not reliably detected in the image. Therefore, it is considered not visible or undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a touchpad with a very low confidence score of 0.03395372677679059, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the touchpad is likely not detected or visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The confidence level of the object detection tool in identifying the Apple logo is 0.04722266258543023, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the Apple logo is not detected with sufficient confidence. Therefore, it can be concluded that the Apple logo is not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the Windows Start button with a very low confidence level of 0.028609233852116098, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning the 'Start' button is not reliably detected or is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the detection tool's output, it is reasonable to conclude that the Windows Start button is not visible or is not confidently identified in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found a handlebar with a very low confidence level of 0.010823781441074754, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the handlebar is not reliably detected in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified a 'cord' with a very low confidence level of 0.0193, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning it did not detect a cord. Therefore, based on the tool's output, there is no cord visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the sensor window with a very low confidence level of 0.029944412930142862, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning the sensor window is considered undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a headlight with a very low confidence score of 0.006144188966039044, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool was not able to detect the headlight with any significant certainty. Therefore, it can be concluded that the headlight is not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: Since the confidence level of detecting a power button is less than 0.1, it indicates that the power button is not reliably detected. Therefore, it is considered not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool was unable to detect the runway number with a confidence level above 0.1, indicating that the runway number is not visible or is too unclear to be detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a track with a very low confidence level of 0.0074731765807213475, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the track was not detected with sufficient confidence. Therefore, based on the object detection tool's output, it is reasonable to conclude that the track is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a driver cab window with a very low confidence level of 0.0474911939342629, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the detection is unreliable and can be considered as not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a 'headlight' with a confidence level of 0.03236758487715675, which is below the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the tool did not detect a headlight with sufficient confidence. Therefore, it can be concluded that the headlight is not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a 'crown' with a very low confidence score of 0.02135387262631458, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it is likely a false detection or not detected at all.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level (0.03112405629174086) in detecting the drain holes, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, and it is likely that the drain holes are not visible or are not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level (0.03497732645526198) for detecting the Start button, which is less than the threshold of 0.1, indicating that the Start button is not reliably detected and is considered undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool was used to identify the cockpit window in the image. The confidence level returned was 0.00994366385994025, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool was not able to detect the cockpit window with a high degree of confidence. Therefore, it can be concluded that the cockpit window is not visible or is very hard to see in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the engine with a very low confidence level of 0.034592449597756654, which is less than the threshold of 0.1 for detection. According to the given criteria, this means the engine is considered undetected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified an engine with a very low confidence level of 0.0266, which is less than the threshold of 0.1. This indicates that the detection is not reliable and can be considered as 'not detected'. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the engine is not visible in the image.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the vertical stabilizer with a confidence level of 0.03446402637724983, which is less than 0.1. According to the given criteria, a confidence level less than 0.1 indicates that the object is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the vertical stabilizer is not considered visible or detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The confidence level for detecting the top lift handle is extremely low at 0.04863247546087553, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the object detection tool did not confidently identify the top lift handle.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The confidence level of the object detection tool is very low (0.0019927356093235316), indicating that it is unlikely to have detected the side view mirror correctly. Therefore, the side view mirror is not visible or is very hard to see.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The main rotor is not visible in the image as indicated by the low confidence score from the object detection tool, suggesting it is not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has a very low confidence level of 0.0337, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool was unable to detect the sip hole with sufficient confidence, suggesting that it is not clearly visible or not visible at all.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The sip hole is not clearly visible as the object detection tool has a very low confidence level of 0.017273865174171576, which is less than 0.1, indicating that it is likely not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has found a USB port with a very low confidence level of 0.0078659643073203, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, and it is likely that the USB port is not visible or not detected correctly. Therefore, the correct answer is that the USB port is not visible.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool has detected a door handle with a very low confidence level of 0.0097, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the door handle is not reliably detected. However, upon visually inspecting the image, a silver handle is clearly visible on the right side of the door. Therefore, despite the low confidence from the object detection tool, the door handle is actually visible in the image.

Answer: 0


Explanation: The object detection tool has identified the latch bolt with a very low confidence score of 0.0326, which is less than 0.1. This indicates that the tool is not confident in its detection, effectively meaning it has not detected the latch bolt. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the latch bolt is considered not visible or not detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool found a bubbler with a very low confidence level of 0.039646125031799304. Since this is less than 0.1, it is considered undetected. Therefore, based on the tool's output, the bubbler is not visible or detected.

Answer: 2


Explanation: The object detection tool failed to detect the charging port with a confidence level above 0.1, indicating that it is not visible or detectable in the given image.

Answer: 2