A NEW OBJECT BASED METHOD FOR AUTOMATED EXTRACTION OF URBAN OBJECTS FROM AIRBORNE SENSORS DATA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The classification of urban objects such as buildings, trees and roads from airborne sensors data is an essential step in numerous mapping and modelling applications. The automation of this step is greatly needed as the manual processing is costly and time consuming. The increasing availability of airborne sensors data such as aerial imagery and LIDAR data offers new opportunities to develop more robust approaches for automatic classification. These approaches should integrate these data sources that have different characteristics to exceed the accuracy achieved using any individual data source. The proposed approach presented in this paper fuses the aerial images data with single return LIDAR data to extract buildings and trees for an urban area. Object based analysis is adopted to segment the entire DSM data into objects based on height variation. These objects are preliminarily classified into buildings, trees, and ground. This primary classification is used to compute the height to ground for each object to help improve the accuracy of the second phase of classification. The overlapping perspective aerial images are used to build an ortho-photo to derive a vegetation index value for each object. The second phase of classification is performed based on the height to ground and the vegetation index of each object. The proposed approach has been tested using three areas in the centre of the city of Vaihingen provided by ISPRS test project on urban classification and 3D building reconstruction. These areas have historic buildings having rather complex shapes, few high-rising residential buildings that are surrounded by trees, and a purely residential area with small detached houses. The results of the proposed approach are presented based on a reference solution for evaluation purposes. The classification evaluation exhibits highly successful classification results of buildings class. The proposed approach follows the exact boundary of trees based on LIDAR data which provide above average classification results for the trees when compared to the assumed ideal circular shaped trees in the reference data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".