MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1504338119 · doi:10.1109/isot.2014.63

Detecting Discontinuous and Occluded Boundaries from Point Clouds of Building Interiors

2014· article· en· W1504338119 on OpenAlexaff
Kuldeep K. Sareen, George K. Knopf, Roberto Canas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint cloudBoundary (topology)CurvatureSpurious relationshipSurface (topology)OutlierAlgorithmComputer scienceRange (aeronautics)Constraint (computer-aided design)Point (geometry)Regular gridComputer visionGridGeometryMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Range scans of occupied building interiors will often generate a cumulative point cloud with disconnected regions due to varying data density and the presence of numerous partially occluded objects. Boundary detection methods based on surface normal vectors and curvature have difficulty in accurately representing occluded region boundaries because of the geometric uncertainty associated with the underlying polygonal surfaces used to determine the desired geometric parameters. An occluded boundary detection algorithm that works directly on point clouds without the need to reconstruct rough underlying surface models is presented in this paper. The algorithm uses a side-ratio constraint to identify the discontinuous boundary points which lie along successive scan lines. The basic principle is that the distance between the immediate neighboring points at the discontinuous boundary exhibits a large disparity when compared to the other points in a contiguous surface. The side ratio distance defines the spatial separation of the proceeding and succeeding data points on the local grid. The algorithm is also able to handle small density inconsistencies by continuously comparing the side-ratios of the nearest points within a preset window. Spurious point data incorrectly identified as discontinuous boundary points are removed using a density-based outlier detection technique. The effectiveness of the two-step algorithm is demonstrated on real-world data acquired using a FARO® LS 880 laser scanner.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage→French-language works237,207→