MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Method for Roof Wireframe Reconstruction Based on Self-Supervised Pretraining

2024· article· en· W4399505024 on OpenAlexaff
Hongxin Yang, Shangfeng Huang, Ruisheng Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMatching (statistics)AutoencoderPoint (geometry)Pattern recognition (psychology)Similarity (geometry)Representation (politics)Identification (biology)Edge detectionComputer visionMathematicsImage (mathematics)Artificial neural networkImage processingGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In this paper, we present a two-stage method for roof wireframe reconstruction employing a self-supervised pretraining technique. The initial stage utilizes a multi-scale mask autoencoder to generate point-wise features. The subsequent stage involves three steps for edge parameter regression. Firstly, the initial edge directions are generated under the guidance of edge point identification. The next step employs edge parameter regression and matching modules to extract the parameters (namely, direction vector and length) of edge representation from the obtained edge features. Finally, a specifically designed edge non-maximum suppression and an edge similarity loss function are employed to optimize the representation of the final wireframe models and eliminate redundant edges. Experimental results indicate that the pre-trained self-supervised model, enriched by the roof wireframe reconstruction task, demonstrates superior performance on both the publicly available Building3D dataset and its post-processed iterations, specifically the Dense dataset, outperforming even traditional methods.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207