MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Learning from Spatio-temporal Correlation for Semi-Supervised LiDAR Semantic Segmentation

2024· article· en· W4405785492 on OpenAlexaff
Seungho Lee, Hwijeong Lee, Hyunjung Shim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersSamsungNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsLidarComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceCorrelationImage segmentationRemote sensingGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the challenges of the semi-supervised LiDAR segmentation (SSLS) problem, particularly in low-budget scenarios. The two main issues in low-budget SSLS are the poor-quality pseudo-labels for unlabeled data, and the performance drops due to the significant imbalance between ground-truth and pseudo-labels. This imbalance leads to a vicious training cycle. To overcome these challenges, we leverage the spatio-temporal prior by recognizing the substantial overlap between temporally adjacent LiDAR scans. We propose a proximity-based label estimation, which generates highly accurate pseudo-labels for unlabeled data by utilizing semantic consistency with adjacent labeled data. Additionally, we enhance this method by progressively expanding the pseudo-labels from the nearest unlabeled scans, which helps significantly reduce errors linked to dynamic classes. Additionally, we employ a dual-branch structure to mitigate performance degradation caused by data imbalance. Experimental results demonstrate remarkable performance in low-budget settings (i.e., ≤ 5%) and meaningful improvements in normal budget settings (i.e., 5 – 50%). Finally, our method has achieved new state-of-the-art results on SemanticKITTI and nuScenes in semi-supervised LiDAR segmentation. With only 5% labeled data, it offers competitive results against fully-supervised counterparts. Moreover, it surpasses the performance of the previous state-of-the-art at 100% labeled data (75.2%) using only 20% of labeled data (76.0%) on nuScenes. The code is available on https://github.com/halbielee/PLE.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications→French-language works237,207→