AUTOMATED ROAD INFORMATION EXTRACTION FROM HIGH RESOLUTION AERIAL LIDAR DATA FOR SMART ROAD APPLICATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Automatic extraction of road features from LiDAR data is a fundamental task for different applications, including asset management. The availability of updated and reliable models is even more important in the context of smart roads. One of the main advantages of LiDAR data compared with other sensing instruments is the possibility to directly get 3D information. However, the task of deriving road networks form LiDAR data acquired with Airborne Laser Scanning (ALS) may be quite complex due to occlusions, low feature separability and shadowing from contextual objects. Indeed, even if roads elements can be identified in the ALS point cloud, the automated identification of the network starting form them can be involved due to large variability in the size of roads, shapes and presence of connected off-road features such as parking lots. This paper presents a workflow aimed at partially solving the automatic creation of a road network from high-resolution ALS data. The presented method consists of three main steps: (i) labelling of road points; (ii) a multi-level voting scheme; and (iii) the regularization of the extracted road segments. The developed method has been tested using the “Vaihingen”, “Toronto” and “Tobermory” data set provided by the ISPRS.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".