MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034214762 · doi:10.1109/cvprw50498.2020.00292

Analyzing symbols in architectural floor plans via traditional computer vision and deep learning approaches

2021· article· en· W3034214762 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Rezvanifar

Bibliographic record

VenueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSpottingSymbol (formal)Floor planClutterArtificial intelligenceSimilarity (geometry)Class (philosophy)Object (grammar)NotationMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Engineering drawingProgramming languageEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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. First, 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. Second, 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. Traditional 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. Third, 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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations40
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria)Same topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207