Matching the building footprints of different vector spatial datasets at a similar scale based on one-class support vector machines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automatic matching of multisource data is an important technique for achieving change detection, fusion and updating spatial data. However, most current learning methods for building footprint matching require a large number of samples, and labeling these samples is costly in terms of labor and time. Moreover, multisource building footprint data are complex and diverse leading to recognizing the different matching relationships is a hard task. Thus, this study proposes a learning-based method for recognizing multisource building footprints matching relationships by using a one-class support vector machine (OCSVM). The OCSVM was trained using only positive samples. First, a set of geometric indicators was designed to train a model and realize initial matching recognition. Then, a contextual metric was calculated based on the rough matching results, and geometric and contextual metrics were combined to train the model and realize relaxed matching recognition. Relaxed matching is an optimization process implemented after initial matching to recognize more relaxed matching relationships. In relaxed matching, a convex hull is used to recognize matching relationships besides 1:1, such as 1:n, m:1 and m:n. The experimental results showed that the proposed method outperformed indicator-weighted (weighted average) and learning-based matching methods, such as traditional SVMs and decision trees (DTs). The precision scores of the proposed model were 97.1%, 95% and 97.2% for the Wuhan (China), Beijing (China) and Richmond Hill (Canada) datasets, respectively. Furthermore, the proposed model identified the matching relationships of buildings with complex geometric features and high-density spatial distributions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".