MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413147393 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52734.2025.02550

Exploring Scene Affinity for Semi-Supervised LiDAR Semantic Segmentation

2025· article· en· W4413147393 on OpenAlexaff
Chuandong Liu, Xingxing Weng, Shuguo Jiang, Pengcheng Li, Lei Yu, Gui-Song Xia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLidarComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceImage segmentationComputer visionRemote sensingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores scene affinity (AIScene), namely intra-scene consistency and inter-scene correlation, for semi-supervised LiDAR semantic segmentation in driving scenes. Adopting teacher-student training, AIScene employs a teacher network to generate pseudo-labeled scenes from unlabeled data, which then supervise the student network’s learning. Unlike most methods that include all points in pseudo-labeled scenes for forward propagation but only pseudo-labeled points for backpropagation, AIScene removes points without pseudo-labels, ensuring consistency in both forward and backward propagation within the scene. This simple point erasure strategy effectively prevents unsupervised, semantically ambiguous points (excluded in backpropagation) from affecting the learning of pseudo-labeled points. Moreover, AIScene incorporates patch-based data augmentation, mixing multiple scenes at both scene and instance levels. Compared to existing augmentation techniques that typically perform scene-level mixing between two scenes, our method enhances the semantic diversity of labeled (or pseudo-labeled) scenes, thereby improving the semi-supervised performance of segmentation models. Experiments show that AIScene outperforms previous methods on two popular benchmarks across four settings, achieving notable improvements of 1.9% and 2.1% in the most challenging 1% labeled data. The code will be released at https://github.com/azhuantou/AIScene.

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)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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