Improving Graph Representation for Point Cloud Segmentation via Attentive Filtering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, self-attention networks achieve impressive performance in point cloud segmentation due to their superiority in modeling long-range dependencies. However, compared to self-attention mechanism, we find graph convolutions show a stronger ability in capturing local geometry information with less computational cost. In this paper, we employ a hybrid architecture design to construct our Graph Convolution Network with Attentive Filtering (AF-GCN), which takes advantage of both graph convolution and selfattention mechanism. We adopt graph convolutions to aggregate local features in the shallow encoder stages, while in the deeper stages, we propose a self-attention-like module named Graph Attentive Filter (GAF) to better model long-range contexts from distant neighbors. Besides, to further improve graph representation for point cloud segmentation, we employ a Spatial Feature Projection (SFP) module for graph convolutions which helps to handle spatial variations of unstructured point clouds. Finally, a graphshared down-sampling and up-sampling strategy is introduced to make full use of the graph structures in point cloud processing. We conduct extensive experiments on multiple datasets including S3DIS, ScanNetV2, Toronto-3D, and ShapeNetPart. Experimental results show our AF-GCN obtains competitive performance.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".