MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779637370 · doi:10.1109/iccv.2017.241

Raster-to-Vector: Revisiting Floorplan Transformation

2017· article· en· W2779637370 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Liu, Jiajun Wu, Pushmeet Kohli, Yasutaka Furukawa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNvidiaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsFloorplanRaster graphicsComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)HeuristicsVector graphicsArtificial intelligenceTransformation (genetics)GraphicsSet (abstract data type)Computer visionVisualizationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the problem of converting a rasterized floorplan image into a vector-graphics representation. Unlike existing approaches that rely on a sequence of lowlevel image processing heuristics, we adopt a learning-based approach. A neural architecture first transforms a rasterized image to a set of junctions that represent low-level geometric and semantic information (e.g., wall corners or door end-points). Integer programming is then formulated to aggregate junctions into a set of simple primitives (e.g., wall lines, door lines, or icon boxes) to produce a vectorized floorplan, while ensuring a topologically and geometrically consistent result. Our algorithm significantly outperforms existing methods and achieves around 90% precision and recall, getting to the range of production-ready performance. The vector representation allows 3D model popup for better indoor scene visualization, direct model manipulation for architectural remodeling, and further computational applications such as data analysis. Our system is efficient: we have converted hundred thousand production-level floorplan images into the vector representation and generated 3D popup models.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations230
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207