MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553256049 · doi:10.22260/isarc2016/0045

Arbitrary 3D Object Extraction from Cluttered Laser Scans Using Local Features

2016· article· en· W2553256049 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Nahangi, Thomas Czerniawski, Christopher Rausch, Carl T. Haas

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ... ISARC · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRANSACComputer sciencePoint cloudArtificial intelligenceComputer visionHough transformFeature extractionLaser scanningObject detectionObject (grammar)Set (abstract data type)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Laser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determination of construction performance metrics requires intensive processing of large amounts of data collected on construction sites including cluttered laser scans.For example, for quality control of construction components using 3D laser scans, the acquired point cloud should be cleaned and the object-of-interest should be extracted for measuring the incurred deviations.Such a procedure is tedious, time consuming and inaccurate due to intensive manual user operations.Although automatic extraction of rough and simple 3D shapes and features is performed by applying techniques such as Hough transform, automatic extraction of construction components with complex geometry is a challenging research need that must be addressed for fully automated modelling and processing.This paper presents a framework for automated extraction of 3D objects with arbitrary shapes and geometry.A new local feature set, which is globally invariant, is created in order to represent 3D models.The feature space created is then searched for in the cluttered laser scan by hashing from a hash table created for the 3D model.The best match is then extracted automatically by applying a post-processing RANSAC loop.The framework is then followed by an ICP-based registration in order to refine the best match identified.The results show that the method is sufficiently robust and quick to be applied for effective and efficient post processing of the laser scans acquired on 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ... ISARCSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207