MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011410192 · doi:10.3390/s20061700

Large-Scale ALS Data Semantic Classification Integrating Location-Context-Semantics Cues by Higher-Order CRF

2020· article· en· W3011410192 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Han, Ruisheng Wang, Daqing Huang, Cheng Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationLomonosov Moscow State UniversityGraduate Research and Innovation Projects of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceSemantics (computer science)Artificial intelligenceContext (archaeology)Probabilistic logicConditional random fieldPairwise comparisonPattern recognition (psychology)Spatial contextual awarenessSmoothingData miningComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We designed a location-context-semantics-based conditional random field (LCS-CRF) framework for the semantic classification of airborne laser scanning (ALS) point clouds. For ALS datasets of high spatial resolution but with severe noise pollutions, more contexture and semantics cues, besides location information, can be exploited to surmount the decrease of discrimination of features for classification. This paper mainly focuses on the semantic classification of ALS data using mixed location-context-semantics cues, which are integrated into a higher-order CRF framework by modeling the probabilistic potentials. The location cues modeled by the unary potentials can provide basic information for discriminating the various classes. The pairwise potentials consider the spatial contextual information by establishing the neighboring interactions between points to favor spatial smoothing. The semantics cues are explicitly encoded in the higher-order potentials. The higher-order potential operates at the clusters level with similar geometric and radiometric properties, guaranteeing the classification accuracy based on semantic rules. To demonstrate the performance of our approach, two standard benchmark datasets were utilized. Experiments show that our method achieves superior classification results with an overall accuracy of 83.1% on the Vaihingen Dataset and an overall accuracy of 94.3% on the Graphics and Media Lab (GML) Dataset A compared with other classification algorithms in the literature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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