MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ROBUST CLASSIFICATION AND SEGMENTATION OF PLANAR AND LINEAR FEATURES FOR CONSTRUCTION SITE PROGRESS MONITORING AND STRUCTURAL DIMENSION COMPLIANCE CONTROL

2015· article· en· W2276740893 on OpenAlexafffund
Reza Maalek, Derek D. Lichti, Janaka Y. Ruwanpura

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOutlierSegmentationComputer sciencePoint cloudData miningDimension (graph theory)LidarCluster analysisPoint (geometry)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Remote sensingGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The application of terrestrial laser scanners (TLSs) on construction sites for automating construction progress monitoring and controlling structural dimension compliance is growing markedly. However, current research in construction management relies on the planned building information model (BIM) to assign the accumulated point clouds to their corresponding structural elements, which may not be reliable in cases where the dimensions of the as-built structure differ from those of the planned model and/or the planned model is not available with sufficient detail. In addition outliers exist in construction site datasets due to data artefacts caused by moving objects, occlusions and dust. In order to overcome the aforementioned limitations, a novel method for robust classification and segmentation of planar and linear features is proposed to reduce the effects of outliers present in the LiDAR data collected from construction sites. First, coplanar and collinear points are classified through a robust principal components analysis procedure. The classified points are then grouped using a robust clustering method. A method is also proposed to robustly extract the points belonging to the flat-slab floors and/or ceilings without performing the aforementioned stages in order to preserve computational efficiency. The applicability of the proposed method is investigated in two scenarios, namely, a laboratory with 30 million points and an actual construction site with over 150 million points. The results obtained by the two experiments validate the suitability of the proposed method for robust segmentation of planar and linear features in contaminated datasets, such as those collected from construction sites.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207