Feature selection for airborne LiDAR data filtering: a mutual information method with Parzon window optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Filtering is one of the key steps for Digital Elevation Model (DEM) generation from airborne Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data. Machine-learning-based filters have emerged as a class of filtering algorithms in recent years. Most existing studies mainly focus on feature generation due to limited available features a point cloud possesses. More than 30 features have been described in the existing literature. But most generated features are based on geometric information of points. Several redundant and irrelevant features may not necessarily improve the filtering accuracy. Hence, this paper proposes a feature-selection method using minimal-Redundancy-Maximal-Relevance (mRMR) combined with Parzen window optimization to deal with both discrete and continuous features. An optimal/suboptimal feature subset is constructed for machine-learning filters in various landscapes. Experimental results based on AdaBoost show that height-related features, particularly height itself, are of the greatest significance in both urban and rural scenes. Moreover, different subsets can be selected from the datasets of the two landscapes by our feature-selection strategy, which increases the data relevance for describing each geographical landscape. This study provides guidelines for the selection of optimal/suboptimal features for point cloud filtering based on machine-learning algorithms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".