MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

YUTO SEMANTIC: A LARGE SCALE AERIAL LIDAR DATASET FOR SEMANTIC SEGMENTATION

2023· article· en· W4389656624 on OpenAlexafffund
Shin Yoo, Connie Ko, Gunho Sohn, H. Lee

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPoint cloudSegmentationComputer scienceLidarBenchmark (surveying)Scale (ratio)Semantics (computer science)Point (geometry)Semantic computingArtificial intelligenceRemote sensingSemantic WebGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Creating virtual duplicates of the real world has garnered significant attention due to its applications in areas such as autonomous driving, urban planning, and urban mapping. One of the critical tasks in the computer vision community is semantic segmentation of outdoor collected point clouds. The development and research of robust semantic segmentation algorithms heavily rely on precise and comprehensive benchmark datasets. In this paper, we present the York University Teledyne Optech 3D Semantic Segmentation Dataset (YUTO Semantic), a multi-mission large-scale aerial LiDAR dataset specifically designed for 3D point cloud semantic segmentation. The dataset comprises approximately 738 million points, covering an area of 9.46 square kilometers, which results in a high point density of 100 points per square meter. Each point in the dataset is annotated with one of nine semantic classes. Additionally, we conducted performance tests of state-of-the-art algorithms to evaluate their effectiveness in semantic segmentation tasks. The YUTO Semantic dataset serves as a valuable resource for advancing research in 3D point cloud semantic segmentation and contributes to the development of more accurate and robust algorithms for real-world applications. The dataset is available at https://github.com/Yacovitch/YUTO_Semantic.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.010

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207