MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893333163 · doi:10.3390/rs10101531

Mobile Laser Scanned Point-Clouds for Road Object Detection and Extraction: A Review

2018· review· en· W2893333163 on OpenAlexaff
Lingfei Ma, Ying Li, Jonathan Li, Cheng Wang, Ruisheng Wang, Michael A. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer sciencePoint cloudMobile mappingRoad surfaceSoftwarePoint (geometry)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mobile laser scanning (MLS) technique has attracted considerable attention for providing high-density, high-accuracy, unstructured, three-dimensional (3D) geo-referenced point-cloud coverage of the road environment. Recently, there has been an increasing number of applications of MLS in the detection and extraction of urban objects. This paper presents a systematic review of existing MLS related literature. This paper consists of three parts. Part 1 presents a brief overview of the state-of-the-art commercial MLS systems. Part 2 provides a detailed analysis of on-road and off-road information inventory methods, including the detection and extraction of on-road objects (e.g., road surface, road markings, driving lines, and road crack) and off-road objects (e.g., pole-like objects and power lines). Part 3 presents a refined integrated analysis of challenges and future trends. Our review shows that MLS technology is well proven in urban object detection and extraction, since the improvement of hardware and software accelerate the efficiency and accuracy of data collection and processing. When compared to other review papers focusing on MLS applications, we review the state-of-the-art road object detection and extraction methods using MLS data and discuss their performance and applicability. The main contribution of this review demonstrates that the MLS systems are suitable for supporting road asset inventory, ITS-related applications, high-definition maps, and other highly accurate localization services.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations225
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207