Semantic Segmentation Uncertainty Assessment of Different U-net Architectures for Extracting Building Footprints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Automatic extraction of building footprints from aerial and space imageries has been found ever increasing importance in urban planning, disaster management, and environmental monitoring. However, achieving accurate building footprint extraction poses significant challenges due to diverse building characteristics and their similarities to their background elements. While conventional methods in building footprint extraction have mainly relied on image processing techniques, recent advancements in deep learning, particularly semantic segmentation algorithms like U-Net, have shown promise in addressing these challenges through machine learning. This study explores different depths of the U-Net model for building footprint extraction, aiming to identify the optimum architecture while investigating the semantic uncertainty of the building footprint extraction. Utilizing aerial imagery from cities including Berlin, Paris, Chicago, and Zurich, collected from Google Maps and OpenStreetMap (OSM) data, five U-Net models have been compared with varying depths. In addition, the impact of dataset sizes and learning rates on model performance has been investigated. Results confirmed that the U-Net-32-1024 model achieves the highest intersection over union (IoU), Accuracy, and F1-score. Moreover, increasing the training dataset size leads to significant improvements in model performance with IoU, Accuracy and F1-score reaching their values of 73.73%, 88.65% and 88.53%. However, challenges remain in accurately delineating buildings in dense urban areas. Nonetheless, our findings demonstrated the effectiveness of U-Net models in building footprint extraction.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".