Superpixel and Supervoxel Segmentation Assessment of Landslides Using UAV-Derived Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reality capture technologies such as Structure-from-Motion (SfM) photogrammetry have become a state-of-the-art practice within landslide research workflows in recent years. Such technology has been predominantly utilized to provide detailed digital products in landslide assessment where often, for thorough mapping, significant accessibility restrictions must be overcome. UAV photogrammetry produces a set of multi-dimensional digital models to support landslide management, including orthomosaic, digital surface model (DSM), and 3D point cloud. At the same time, the recognition of objects depicted in images has become increasingly possible with the development of various methodologies. Among those, Geographic Object-Based Image Analysis (GEOBIA) has been established as a new paradigm in the geospatial data domain and has also recently found applications in landslide research. However, most of the landslide-related GEOBIA applications focus on large scales based on satellite imagery. In this work, we examine the potential of different UAV photogrammetry product combinations to be used as inputs to image segmentation techniques for the automated extraction of landslide elements at site-specific scales. Image segmentation is the core process within GEOBIA workflows. The objective of this work is to investigate the incorporation of fully 3D data into GEOBIA workflows for the delineation of landslide elements that are often challenging to be identified within typical rasterized models due to the steepness of the terrain. Here, we apply a common unsupervised image segmentation pipeline to 3D grids based on the superpixel/supervoxel and graph cut algorithms. The products of UAV photogrammetry for two landslide cases in Greece are combined and used as 2D (orthomosaic), 2.5D (orthomosaic + DSM), and 3D (point cloud) terrain representations in this research. We provide a detailed quantitative comparative analysis of the different models based on expert-based annotations of the landscapes and conclude that using fully 3D terrain representations as inputs to segmentation algorithms provides consistently better landslide segments.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".