MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

3D-CNN BASED TREE SPECIES CLASSIFICATION USING MOBILE LIDAR DATA

2019· article· en· W2948901405 on OpenAlexaff
Haiyan Guan, Yongtao Yu, Wenxu Yan, D. Li, Jonathan Li

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationTree (set theory)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Cluster analysisVoxelLidarConvolutional neural networkImage segmentationRemote sensingGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Our work addresses the problem of classifying tree species from mobile LiDAR data. The work is a two step-wise strategy, including tree segmentation and tree species classification. In the tree segmentation step, a voxel-based upward growing filtering is proposed to remove terrain points from the mobile laser scanning data. Then, individual trees are segmented via a Euclidean distance clustering approach and Voxel-based Normalized Cut (VNCut) segmentation approach. In the tree species classification, a voxel-based 3D convolutional neural network (3D-CNN) model is developed based on intensity information. A road section data acquired by a RIEGL VMX-450 system are selected for evaluating the proposed tree classification method. Qualitative analysis shows that our algorithm achieves a good performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207