MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120716763 · doi:10.14358/pers.75.6.703

Occlusion-based Methodology for the Classification of Lidar Data

2009· article· en· W2120716763 on OpenAlexaff
Ayman Habib, Yu‐Chuan Chang, Dong Cheon Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarPoint cloudTerrainComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceNoise (video)Remote sensingDigital elevation modelFilter (signal processing)Elevation (ballistics)Interpolation (computer graphics)Raster graphicsGeographyImage (mathematics)CartographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lidar systems have been widely adopted for the acquisition of dense and accurate topographic data over extended areas. The level of detail and the quality of the collected point cloud motivated the research community to investigate the possibility of automatic object extraction from such data. Prior knowledge of the terrain surface will improve the performance of object detection and extraction procedures. In this paper, a new strategy for automatic terrain extraction from lidar data is presented. The proposed strategy is based on the fact that sudden elevation changes, which usually correspond to non-ground objects, will cause relief displacements in perspective views. The introduced relief displacements will occlude neighboring ground points. To start the process, we generate a digital surface model (DSM) from the irregular lidar points using an interpolation procedure. The presence of sudden-elevation changes and the resulting occlusions can be discerned by sequentially checking the off-nadir angles to the lines of sight connecting the DSM cells and a pre-defined set of synthesized projection centers. Detected occlusions are then used to identify the occluding points, which are hypothesized to be non-ground points. Surface roughness and discontinuities together with inherent noise in the point cloud will lead to some false hypotheses. Therefore, we use a statistical filter to remove these false hypotheses. The performance of the algorithm has been evaluated and verified using both simulated and real lidar datasets with varying levels of complexity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotogrammetric Engineering & Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207