MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408174455 · doi:10.14358/pers.24-00100r2

A Comparative Study of Deep Learning Methods for Automated Road Network Extraction from High-Spatial-Resolution Remotely Sensed Imagery

2025· article· en· W4408174455 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutomated Road and Building Extraction
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDeep learningRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceHigh resolutionAerial imageryExtraction (chemistry)CartographyComputer visionGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road network data are crucial for various applications, such as road network planning, traffic control, map navigation, autonomous driving, and smart city construction. Automated road network extraction from high-spatial-resolution remotely sensed imagery has shown promise in road network data construction. In recent years, the advent of deep learning algorithms has pushed road network extraction towards auto - mation, achieving very high accuracy. However, the latest deep learning models are often less applied in the field of road network extraction and lack comparative experiments for guidance. Therefore, this research selected three recent deep learning algorithms, including dense prediction transformer (DPT), SegFormer, SEgmentation TRansformer (SETR), and the classic model fully convolutional network-8s (FCN-8s) for a comparative study. Additionally, this research paper compares three different decoder structures within the SETR model (SETR_naive, SETR_mla, SETR_pup) to investigate the effect of different decoders on the road network extraction task. The experiment is conducted on three commonly used datasets: the DeepGlobe Dataset, the Massachusetts Dataset, and Road Datasets in Complex Mountain Environments (RDCME). The DPT model outperforms other models on the Massachusetts dataset with superior reliability, achieving a high accuracy of 96.31% and excelling with a precision of 81.78% and recall of 32.50%, leading to an F1 score of 46.51%. While SegFormer has a slightly higher F1 score, DPT's precision is particularly valuable for minimizing false positives, making it the most balanced and reliable choice. Similarly, for the DeepGlobe Dataset, DPT achieves an accuracy of 96.76%, precision of 66.12%, recall of 41.37%, and F1 score of 50.89%, and for RDCME, DPT achieves an accuracy of 98.94%, precision of 99.07%, recall of 99.84%, and F1 score of 99.46%, confirming its consistent performance across datasets. This paper provides valuable guidance for future studies on road network extraction techniques using deep learning algorithms.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.289 · 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