Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Buildings with symmetrical façades are ubiquitous in urban landscapes and detailed models of these buildings enhance the visual realism of digital urban scenes. However, a vast majority of the existing urban building models in web‐based 3D maps such as Google earth are either less detailed or heavily rely on texturing to render the details. We present a new framework for enhancing the details of such coarse models, using the geometry and symmetry inferred from the light detection and ranging (LiDAR) scans and 2D templates. The user‐defined 2D templates, referred to as coded planar meshes (CPMs), encodes the geometry of the smallest repeating 3D structures of the façades via face codes. Our encoding scheme, take into account the directions, type as well as the offset distance of the sculpting to be applied at the respective locations on the coarse model. In our approach, LiDAR scan is registered with the coarse models taken from Google earth 3D or Bing maps 3D and decomposed into dominant planar segments (each representing the frontal or lateral walls of the building). The façade segments are then split into horizontal and vertical tiles using a weighted point count function defined over the window or door boundaries. This is followed by an automatic identification of CPM locations with the help of a template fitting algorithm that respects the alignment regularity as well as the inter‐element spacing on the façade layout. Finally, 3D boolean sculpting operations are applied over the boxes induced by CPMs and the coarse model, and a detailed 3D model is generated. The proposed framework is capable of modelling details even with occluded scans and enhances not only the frontal façades (facing to the streets) but also the lateral façades of the buildings. We demonstrate the potentials of the proposed framework by providing several examples of enhanced Google earth models and highlight the advantages of our method when designing photo‐realistic urban façades.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".