MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389246202 · doi:10.1111/phor.12468

Weakly supervised semantic segmentation of mobile laser scanning point clouds via category balanced random annotation and deep consistency‐guided self‐distillation mechanism

2023· article· en· W4389246202 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jiacheng Liu, Haiyan Guan, Xiangda Lei, Yongtao Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Photogrammetric Record · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSegmentationPoint cloudComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)Artificial intelligenceDistillationAnnotationMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Scene understanding of mobile laser scanning (MLS) point clouds is vital in autonomous driving and virtual reality. Most existing semantic segmentation methods rely on a large number of accurately labelled points, which is time‐consuming and labour‐intensive. To cope with this issue, this paper explores a weakly supervised learning (WSL) framework for MLS data. Specifically, a category balanced random annotation (CBRA) strategy is employed to obtain balanced labels and enhance model performance. Next, based on KPConv‐Net as a backbone network, a WSL semantic segmentation framework is developed for MLS point clouds via a deep consistency‐guided self‐distillation (DCS) mechanism. The DCS mechanism consists of a deep consistency‐guided self‐distillation branch and an entropy regularisation branch. The self‐distillation branch is designed by constructing an auxiliary network to maintain the consistency of predicted distributions between the auxiliary network and the original network, while the entropy regularisation branch is designed to increase the confidence of the network predicted results. The proposed WSL framework was evaluated on the WHU‐MLS, NPM3D and Toronto3D datasets. By using only 0.1% labelled points, the proposed WSL framework achieved a competitive performance in MLS point cloud semantic segmentation with the mean Intersection over Union (mIoU) scores of 60.08%, 72.0% and 67.42% on the three datasets, respectively.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Photogrammetric RecordSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207