GAT-CADNet: Graph Attention Network for Panoptic Symbol Spotting in CAD Drawings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spotting graphical symbols from the computer-aided design (CAD) drawings is essential to many industrial applications. Different from raster images, CAD drawings are vector graphics consisting of geometric primitives such as segments, arcs, and circles. By treating each CAD drawing as a graph, we propose a novel graph attention network GAT-CADNet to solve the panoptic symbol spotting problem: vertex features derived from the GAT branch are mapped to semantic labels, while their attention scores are cascaded and mapped to instance prediction. Our key contributions are three-fold: 1) the instance symbol spotting task is formulated as a subgraph detection problem and solved by predicting the adjacency matrix; 2) a relative spatial encoding (RSE) module explicitly encodes the relative positional and geometric relation among vertices to enhance the vertex attention; 3) a cascaded edge encoding (CEE) module extracts vertex attentions from multiple stages of GAT and treats them as edge encoding to predict the adjacency matrix. The proposed GAT-CADNet is intuitive yet effective and manages to solve the panoptic symbol spotting problem in one consolidated network. Extensive experiments and ablation studies on the public benchmark show that our graph-based approach surpasses existing state-of-the-art methods by a large margin.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it