Detection and Classification of Buildings by Height from Single Urban High-Resolution Remote Sensing Images
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
Recent improvements in remote sensing technologies have boosted building detection techniques from rough classifications using moderate resolution imagery to precise extraction from high-resolution imagery. Shadows frequently emerge in high-resolution urban images. To exploit shadow information, we developed a novel building detection and classification algorithm for images of urban areas with large-size shadows, employing only the visible spectral bands to determine the height levels of buildings. The proposed method, building general-classified by height (BGCH), calculates shadow orientation, detects buildings using seed-blocks, and classifies the buildings into different height groups. Our proposed approach was tested on complex urban scenes from Toronto and Beijing. The experimental results illustrate that our proposed method accurately and efficiently detects and classifies buildings by their height levels; the building detection rate exceeded 95%. The precision of classification by height levels was over 90%. This novel building-height-level detection method provides rich information at low cost and is suitable for further city scene analysis, flood disaster risk assessment, population estimation, and building change detection applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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