Integrating OpenStreetMap tags for efficient LiDAR point cloud classification using graph neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The urban environment exhibits significant vertical variations, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) point cloud classification can provide insights for the 3D morphology of the urban environment. Introducing the adjacency relationships between urban objects can enhance the accuracy of LiDAR point cloud classification. Graph Neural Network (GNN) is a popular architecture to infer the labels of urban objects by utilizing adjacency relationships. However, existing methods ignored the power of the known labels of urban objects, such as crowd-sourced tagged labels from OpenStreetMap (OSM) data, in the inferring process. Therefore, this study proposes a strategy introduces OSM data into GNN for LiDAR point cloud classification. First, we perform an over-segmentation of the LiDAR point cloud to obtain superpoints, which act as basic elements for constructing superpoint adjacency graphs. Second, PointNet is applied to embed superpoint features and edge features are generated using these superpoint features. Finally, OSM data is associated with some part of superpoints and incorporated into the GNN to update the embedded features of superpoints. The results demonstrate that the GNN with OSM data significantly improves the classification accuracy of original GNN. The improvement highlights taking advantage of crowd-sourced geoinformation in LiDAR point cloud classification for understanding 3D urban landscape.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".