MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253626339 · doi:10.3390/s16020140

Segmentation of Planar Surfaces from Laser Scanning Data Using the Magnitude of Normal Position Vector for Adaptive Neighborhoods

2016· article· en· W2253626339 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Changjae Kim, Ayman Habib, Mu-Wook Pyeon, Goo‐Rak Kwon, Jaehoon Jung, Joon Heo

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMyongji UniversityYork University
KeywordsSegmentationLaser scanningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCorrectnessPoint cloudOffset (computer science)LaserComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)NormalMathematicsAlgorithmOpticsSurface (topology)GeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diverse approaches to laser point segmentation have been proposed since the emergence of the laser scanning system. Most of these segmentation techniques, however, suffer from limitations such as sensitivity to the choice of seed points, lack of consideration of the spatial relationships among points, and inefficient performance. In an effort to overcome these drawbacks, this paper proposes a segmentation methodology that: (1) reduces the dimensions of the attribute space; (2) considers the attribute similarity and the proximity of the laser point simultaneously; and (3) works well with both airborne and terrestrial laser scanning data. A neighborhood definition based on the shape of the surface increases the homogeneity of the laser point attributes. The magnitude of the normal position vector is used as an attribute for reducing the dimension of the accumulator array. The experimental results demonstrate, through both qualitative and quantitative evaluations, the outcomes' high level of reliability. The proposed segmentation algorithm provided 96.89% overall correctness, 95.84% completeness, a 0.25 m overall mean value of centroid difference, and less than 1° of angle difference. The performance of the proposed approach was also verified with a large dataset and compared with other approaches. Additionally, the evaluation of the sensitivity of the thresholds was carried out. In summary, this paper proposes a robust and efficient segmentation methodology for abstraction of an enormous number of laser points into plane information.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations42
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207