MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402784876 · doi:10.3390/rs16183434

Semantic Segmentation-Driven Integration of Point Clouds from Mobile Scanning Platforms in Urban Environments

2024· article· en· W4402784876 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joanna Koszyk, Aleksandra Jasińska, Karolina Pargieła, Anna Malczewska, Kornelia Grzelka, Agnieszka Bieda, Łukasz Ambroziński

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePoint cloudSegmentationRemote sensingComputer visionGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precise and complete 3D representations of architectural structures or industrial sites are essential for various applications, including structural monitoring or cadastre. However, acquiring these datasets can be time-consuming, particularly for large objects. Mobile scanning systems offer a solution for such cases. In the case of complex scenes, multiple scanning systems are required to obtain point clouds that can be merged into a comprehensive representation of the object. Merging individual point clouds obtained from different sensors or at different times can be difficult due to discrepancies caused by moving objects or changes in the scene over time, such as seasonal variations in vegetation. In this study, we present the integration of point clouds obtained from two mobile scanning platforms within a built-up area. We utilized a combination of a quadruped robot and an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The PointNet++ network was employed to conduct a semantic segmentation task, enabling the detection of non-ground objects. The experimental tests used the Toronto 3D dataset and DALES for network training. Based on the performance, the model trained on DALES was chosen for further research. The proposed integration algorithm involved semantic segmentation of both point clouds, dividing them into square subregions, and performing subregion selection by checking the emptiness or when both subregions contained points. Parameters such as local density, centroids, coverage, and Euclidean distance were evaluated. Point cloud merging and augmentation enhanced with semantic segmentation and clustering resulted in the exclusion of points associated with these movable objects from the point clouds. The comparative analysis of the method and simple merging was performed based on file size, number of points, mean roughness, and noise estimation. The proposed method provided adequate results with the improvement of point cloud quality indicators.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207