MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990398679 · doi:10.3390/s19235262

Automated Method of Extracting Urban Roads Based on Region Growing from Mobile Laser Scanning Data

2019· article· en· W2990398679 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Li, Ruisheng Wang, Yanxia Wang, Ge Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint cloudGaussian curvatureCurvatureLaser scanningComputer scienceFocus (optics)Extraction (chemistry)TangentRegion growingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPlane (geometry)Point (geometry)GeographyImage processingMathematicsImage (mathematics)LaserGeometryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid development of three-dimensional point cloud acquisition from mobile laser scanning systems, the extraction of urban roads has become a major research focus. Although it has great potential for digital image processing, the extraction of roads using the region growing approach is still in its infancy. We propose an automated method of urban road extraction based on region growing. First, an initial seed is chosen under constraints relating to the Gaussian curvature, height and number of neighboring points, which ensures that the initial seed is located on a road. Then, the growing condition is determined by the angle threshold of the tangent plane of the seed point. Then, new seeds are selected based on the identified road points and their curvature. The method also includes a strategy for dealing with multiple discontinuous roads in a dataset. The result shows that the method can not only achieve high accuracy in urban road extraction but is also stable and robust.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207