MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946865217 · doi:10.3390/rs11101248

Higher-Order Conditional Random Fields-Based 3D Semantic Labeling of Airborne Laser-Scanning Point Clouds

2019· article· en· W2946865217 on OpenAlexaff
Yong Li, Dong Chen, Xiance Du, Shaobo Xia, Yuliang Wang, Sheng Xu, Qiang Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersState Key Laboratory of Geo-Information EngineeringNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsConditional random fieldCluster analysisPoint cloudComputer sciencePairwise comparisonUnary operationPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceTopology (electrical circuits)AlgorithmData miningMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel framework to achieve 3D semantic labeling of objects (e.g., trees, buildings, and vehicles) from airborne laser-scanning point clouds. To this end, we propose a framework which consists of hierarchical clustering and higher-order conditional random fields (CRF) labeling. In the hierarchical clustering, the raw point clouds are over-segmented into a set of fine-grained clusters by integrating the point density clustering and the classic K-means clustering algorithm, followed by the proposed probability density clustering algorithm. Through this process, we not only obtain a more uniform size and more homogeneous clusters with semantic consistency, but the topological relationships of the cluster’s neighborhood are implicitly maintained by turning the problem of topology maintenance into a clustering problem based on the proposed probability density clustering algorithm. Subsequently, the fine-grained clusters and their topological context are fed into the CRF labeling step, from which the fine-grained cluster’s semantic labels are learned and determined by solving a multi-label energy minimization formulation, which simultaneously considers the unary, pairwise, and higher-order potentials. Our experiments of classifying urban and residential scenes demonstrate that the proposed approach reaches 88.5% and 86.1% of “m F 1 ” estimated by averaging all classes of the F 1 -scores. We prove that the proposed method outperforms five other state-of-the-art methods. In addition, we demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed energy terms by using an “ablation study” strategy.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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