Extraction of Power Lines and Pylons from LiDAR Point Clouds Using a GCN-Based Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The routine power line inspection is critical to maintain the reliability, availability, and sustainability of electricity supply. As a key part of inspection, power lines and pylons extraction is essential for resource management and power corridor safety, especially in the mountain regions. In this paper, we proposed a deep learning based method to extract power lines and pylons using ALS point clouds. First, a structure information preserved module is designed to mine the relationship of local neighborhood points. Then, a graph convolutional network (GCN) is used as basic module to extract point features. Finally, three categories, power lines, pylons and other objects are segmented from input point clouds. In addition, we provide an effective data enhancement strategy to generate enough samples to train the proposed model. We evaluated our method using a dataset acquired by our ALS scanning system. Experimental results demonstrate that our method is superior to the state-of-the-art methods on descriptiveness and efficiency. The overall accuracy and mean time are 99.1% and 9.3 seconds, respectively.
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) | 0.001 | 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".