MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381615821 · doi:10.1061/jcemd4.coeng-13020

Integrating Inverse Photogrammetry and a Deep Learning–Based Point Cloud Segmentation Approach for Automated Generation of BIM Models

2023· article· en· W4381615821 on OpenAlexaff
Zhongming Xiang, Abbas Rashidi, Ge Ou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint cloudPhotogrammetryComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligencePoint (geometry)Deep learningComputer visionTestbedData miningGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatically converting three-dimensional (3D) point clouds into building information modeling (BIM) has been an active research area over the past few years. However, existing solutions in the literature have been suffering the limitations of covering all different design scenarios (prior knowledge-based approach) or collecting sufficient point clouds as training data sets (3D deep learning–based approach). To tackle this issue, we propose a fused system to automatically develop as-built BIMs from photogrammetric point clouds. A series of images is captured to generate a high-quality point cloud, which is then preprocessed by removing noise and downsizing points. Meanwhile, a two-dimensional (2D) deep-learning method, DeepLab, is utilized to semantically segment elements (e.g., walls, slabs, and columns) from the collected images. Subsequently, an inverse photogrammetric pipeline is employed to recognize element categories in the point cloud by projecting the isolated 3D planes into 2D images and assigning the identified elements to the 3D planes. Finally, the industry foundation classes are devised to create as-built BIMs based on the segmented point clouds. In order to evaluate the performance of the proposed system, we selected six cases with various elements as the testbed. The prospective results reveal that (1) our system can provide a highly automated solution to develop as-built BIMs; and (2) 39 out of 45 elements in six different cases are successfully recognized in point clouds.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Construction Engineering and ManagementSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207