MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantization in Relative Gradient Angle Domain For Building Polygon Estimation

2021· article· en· W3160112928 on OpenAlexaff
Yuhao Chen, Yifan Wu, Linlin Xu, Alexander Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutomated Road and Building Extraction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligencePolygon (computer graphics)Leverage (statistics)Computer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building footprint extraction in remote sensing data benefits many important applications, such as urban planning and population estimation. Recently, rapid development of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and open-sourced high resolution satellite building image datasets have pushed the performance boundary further for automated building extractions. However, CNN approaches often generate imprecise building morphologies including noisy edges and round corners. In this paper, we leverage the performance of CNNs, and propose a module that uses prior knowledge of building corners to create angular and concise building polygons from CNN segmentation outputs. We describe a new transform, Relative Gradient Angle Transform (RGA Transform) that converts object contours from time vs. space to time vs. angle. We propose a new shape descriptor, Boundary Orientation Relation Set (BORS), to describe angle relationship between edges in RGA domain, such as orthogonality and parallelism. Finally, we develop an energy minimization framework that makes use of the angle relationship in BORS to straighten edges and reconstruct sharp corners, and the resulting corners create a polygon. Experimental results demonstrate that our method refines CNN output from a rounded approximation to a more clear-cut angular shape of the building footprint.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutomated Road and Building ExtractionFrench-language works237,207