A literature synthesis of LiDAR applications in transportation: feature extraction and geometric assessments of highways
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in using Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) technology in Transportation Engineering has grown over the past decade. The high accuracy of LiDAR datasets and the efficiency by which they can be collected has led many transportation agencies to consider mobile LiDAR as an alternative to conventional tools when surveying roadway infrastructure. Nonetheless, extracting semantic information from LiDAR datasets can be extremely challenging. Although extracting roadway features from LiDAR has been considered in previous research, the extraction of some features has received more attention than others. In fact, for some roadway design elements, attempts to extract those elements from LiDAR have been extremely scarce. To document the research that has been done in this area, this paper conducts a thorough review of existing studies while also highlighting areas where more research is required. Unlike previous research, this paper includes a thorough review of the previous attempts at data extraction from LiDAR while summarizing the detailed steps of the extraction procedure proposed in each study. Moreover, the paper also identifies common tools and techniques used to extract information from LiDAR for transportation applications. The paper also highlights common limitations in existing algorithms that could be improved in future research. This paper represents a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners interested in knowing the current state of research on the applications of LiDAR in the field of Transportation Engineering while also understanding the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it