MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011788244 · doi:10.1109/cvprw50498.2020.00109

Toronto-3D: A Large-scale Mobile LiDAR Dataset for Semantic Segmentation of Urban Roadways

2020· preprint· en· W3011788244 on OpenAlexaffabout
Weikai Tan, Nannan Qin, Lingfei Ma, Ying Li, Jing Du, Guorong Cai, Ke Yang, Jonathan Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarComputer scienceScale (ratio)SegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionRemote sensingGeologyGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semantic segmentation of large-scale outdoor point clouds is essential for urban scene understanding in various applications, especially autonomous driving and urban high-definition (HD) mapping. With rapid developments of mobile laser scanning (MLS) systems, massive point clouds are available for scene understanding, but publicly accessible large-scale labeled datasets, which are essential for developing learning-based methods, are still limited. This paper introduces Toronto-3D, a large-scale urban outdoor point cloud dataset acquired by a MLS system in Toronto, Canada for semantic segmentation. This dataset covers approximately 1 km of point clouds and consists of about 78.3 million points with 8 labeled object classes. Baseline experiments for semantic segmentation were conducted and the results confirmed the capability of this dataset to train deep learning models effectively. Toronto-3D is released1to encourage new research, and the labels will be improved and updated with feedback from the research community.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.008

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations297
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207