Analyzing symbols in architectural floor plans via traditional computer vision and deep learning approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Architectural floor plans are scale-accurate 2D drawings of one level of a building, seen from above, which convey structural and semantic information related to rooms, walls, symbols, textual data, etc. They consist of lines, curves, symbols, and textual markings, showing the relationships between rooms and all physical features, required for the proper construction or renovation of the building. \n \nFirst, this thesis provides a thorough study of state-of-the-art on symbol spotting methods for architectural drawings, an application domain providing the document image analysis and graphic recognition communities with an interesting set of challenges linked to the sheer complexity and density of embedded information, that have yet to be resolved. \n \nSecond, we propose a hybrid method that capitalizes on strengths of both vector-based and pixel-based symbol spotting techniques. In the description phase, the salient geometric constituents of a symbol are extracted by a variety of vectorization techniques, including a proposed voting-based algorithm for finding partial ellipses. This enables us to better handle local shape irregularities and boundary discontinuities, as well as partial occlusion and overlap. In the matching phase, the spatial relationship between the geometric primitives is encoded via a primitive-aware proximity graph. A statistical approach is then used to rapidly yield a coarse localization of symbols within the plan. Localization is further refined with a pixel-based step implementing a modified cross-correlation function. Experimental results on the public SESYD synthetic dataset and real-world images demonstrate that our approach clearly outperforms other popular symbol spotting approaches. \n \nTraditional on-the-fly symbol spotting methods are unable to address the semantic challenge of graphical notation variability, i.e. low intra-class symbol similarity, an issue that is particularly important in architectural floor plan analysis. The presence of occlusion and clutter, characteristic of real-world plans, along with a varying graphical symbol complexity from almost trivial to highly complex, also pose challenges to existing spotting methods. \n \nThird, we address all the above issues by leveraging recent advances in deep learning-based neural networks and adapting an object detection framework based on the YOLO (You Only Look Once) architecture. We propose a training strategy based on tiles, avoiding many issues particular to deep learning-based object detection networks related to the relatively small size of symbols compared to entire floor plans, aspect ratios, and data augmentation. Experimental results demonstrate that our method successfully detects architectural symbols with low intra-class similarity and of variable graphical complexity, even in the presence of heavy occlusion and clutter.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".