Automatic Extraction of Road Points from Airborne LiDAR Based on Bidirectional Skewness Balancing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Road extraction from Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) has become a hot topic over recent years. Nevertheless, it is still challenging to perform this task in a fully automatic way. Experiments are often carried out over small datasets with a focus on urban areas and it is unclear how these methods perform in less urbanized sites. Furthermore, some methods require the manual input of critical parameters, such as an intensity threshold. Aiming to address these issues, this paper proposes a method for the automatic extraction of road points suitable for different landscapes. Road points are identified using pipeline filtering based on a set of constraints defined on the intensity, curvature, local density, and area. We focus especially on the intensity constraint, as it is the key factor to distinguish between road and ground points. The optimal intensity threshold is established automatically by an improved version of the skewness balancing algorithm. Evaluation was conducted on ten study sites with different degrees of urbanization. Road points were successfully extracted in all of them with an overall completeness of 93%, a correctness of 83%, and a quality of 78%. These results are competitive with the state-of-the-art.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".