Curved Buildings Reconstruction From Airborne LiDAR Data by Matching and Deforming Geometric Primitives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Airborne light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data are widely applied in building reconstruction, with studies reporting success in typical buildings. However, the reconstruction of curved buildings remains an open research problem. To this end, we propose a new framework for curved building reconstruction via assembling and deforming geometric primitives. The input LiDAR point clouds are first converted into contours where individual buildings are identified. After recognizing geometric units (primitives) from building contours, we get initial models by matching the basic geometric primitives to these primitives. To polish assembly models, we employ a warping field for model refinements. Specifically, an embedded deformation (ED) graph is constructed via downsampling the initial model. Then, the point to model displacements is minimized by adjusting node parameters in the ED graph based on our objective function. The presented framework is validated on several highly curved buildings collected by various LiDAR in different cities. The experimental results, as well as accuracy comparison, demonstrate the advantage and effectiveness of our method. The new insight attributes to an efficient reconstruction manner. Moreover, we prove that the primitive-based framework significantly reduces the data storage to 10%-20% of classical mesh models.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".