MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313528395 · doi:10.1080/2150704x.2022.2163203

R-ProjNet: an optimal rotated-projection neural network for wood segmentation from point clouds

2022· article· en· W4313528395 on OpenAlexaff
Sheng Xu, Xin Li, Hongxin Yang, Shanshan Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPoint cloudProjection (relational algebra)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceSegmentationPreprocessorArtificial neural networkComputer visionConvolution (computer science)Laser scanningProcess (computing)AlgorithmLaserOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work aims to provide a deep learning framework to segment woods from tree point clouds. We develop a novel preprocessing layer before the classical sampling and convolution structure called the projection layer to organize 3D point clouds into 2D points. Input data are transformed into projection data along axis and planes for the subsequent convolution process, which helps decrease the complexity of networks. In order to obtain optimal and effective projection data for capturing local features, we formulate the 2D transformation in the learning process using two learnable angle parameters. The projection map is updated in the learning process for capturing geometric structure information, which plays an important role in wood point segmentation. Experiments show that we have achieved the loss and misclassification error of 0.41% and 8%, respectively, on wood points extraction from handheld laser scanning data. Besides, we also achieve the correctness, completeness and F-score of 90.4%, 91.5% and 0.91, respectively, in a public vehicle laser scanning dataset.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote Sensing LettersSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207