A Knowledge Base for Automatic Feature Recognition from Point Clouds in an Urban Scene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LiDAR technology can provide very detailed and highly accurate geospatial information on an urban scene for the creation of Virtual Geographic Environments (VGEs) for different applications. However, automatic 3D modeling and feature recognition from LiDAR point clouds are very complex tasks. This becomes even more complex when the data is incomplete (occlusion problem) or uncertain. In this paper, we propose to build a knowledge base comprising of ontology and semantic rules aiming at automatic feature recognition from point clouds in support of 3D modeling. First, several modules for ontology are defined from different perspectives to describe an urban scene. For instance, the spatial relations module allows the formalized representation of possible topological relations extracted from point clouds. Then, a knowledge base is proposed that contains different concepts, their properties and their relations, together with constraints and semantic rules. Then, instances and their specific relations form an urban scene and are added to the knowledge base as facts. Based on the knowledge and semantic rules, a reasoning process is carried out to extract semantic features of the objects and their components in the urban scene. Finally, several experiments are presented to show the validity of our approach to recognize different semantic features of buildings from LiDAR point clouds.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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.
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".