MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911823924 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2019.2893892

Outdoor Semantic Segmentation for UGVs Based on CNN and Fully Connected CRFs

2019· article· en· W2911823924 on OpenAlexaff
Zengshuai Qiu, Fei Yan, Yan Zhuang, Henry Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersState Key Laboratory of RoboticsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceRGB color modelComputer visionPoint cloudComputer scienceSegmentationImage segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies semantic segmentation in outdoor scene based on multi-sensor fusion data by unmanned ground vehicle (UGV). Laser, camera, and inertial navigation are fused into RGB-DI (RGB, depth and intensity) point cloud. Because of the speed change of the UGV in outdoor scene, laser scanning points in 3D space are distributed irregularly and unbalanced. It is difficult to extract features in point cloud to describe objects accurately. Therefore, this paper proposes a projection algorithm to generate a 2D RGB-DI image from the 3D RGB-DI point cloud so that the semantic segmentation in RGB-DI cloud points is transformed to the semantic segmentation in RGB-DI images. To adequately describe multiple objects in the RGB-DI images, a convolutional neural network (CNN) model is designed to extract abstract features. Since the fully connected CRF model takes into account the context of each object location in an RGB-DI image, the fully connected CRF model is used as a classifier to complete the semantic segmentation in the RGB-DI image. According to the corresponding relation between each point in the 3D point cloud and each pixel in the RGB-DI image, segmentation results in the RGB-DI image are mapped back to the original point clouds. Different datasets are used to evaluate our algorithms. Moreover, real-world experiments were applied to our UGV platform to show the practicability and validity of the proposed approach.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207