A Large-Scale Building Unsupervised Extraction Method Leveraging Airborne LiDAR Point Clouds and Remote Sensing Images Based on a Dual P-Snake Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automatic large-scale building extraction from the LiDAR point clouds and remote sensing images is a growing focus in the fields of the sensor applications and remote sensing. However, this building extraction task remains highly challenging due to the complexity of building sizes, shapes, and surrounding environments. In addition, the discreteness, sparsity, and irregular distribution of point clouds, lighting, and shadows, as well as occlusions of the images, also seriously affect the accuracy of building extraction. To address the above issues, we propose a new unsupervised building extraction algorithm PBEA (Point and Pixel Building Extraction Algorithm) based on a new dual P-snake model (Dual Point and Pixel Snake Model). The proposed dual P-snake model is an enhanced active boundary model, which uses both point clouds and images simultaneously to obtain the inner and outer boundaries. The proposed dual P-snake model enables interaction and convergence between the inner and outer boundaries to improve the performance of building boundary detection, especially in complex scenes. Using the dual P-snake model and polygonization, this proposed PBEA can accurately extract large-scale buildings. We evaluated our PBEA and dual P-snake model on the ISPRS Vaihingen dataset and the Toronto dataset. The experimental results show that our PBEA achieves an area-based quality evaluation metric of 90.0% on the Vaihingen dataset and achieves the area-based quality evaluation metric of 92.4% on the Toronto dataset. Compared with other methods, our method demonstrates satisfactory performance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".