Label-Efficient Point Cloud Segmentation with Active Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semantic segmentation of 3D point cloud data often comes with high annotation costs. Active learning automates the process of selecting which data to annotate, reducing the total amount of annotation needed to achieve satisfactory performance. Recent approaches to active learning for 3D point clouds are often based on sophisticated heuristics for both, splitting point clouds into annotatable regions and selecting the most beneficial for further neural network training. In this work, we propose a novel and easy-to-implement strategy to separate the point cloud into annotatable regions. In our approach, we utilize a 2D grid to subdivide the point cloud into columns. To identify the next data to be annotated, we employ a network ensemble to estimate the uncertainty in the network output. We evaluate our method on the S3DIS dataset, the Toronto-3D dataset, and a large-scale urban 3D point cloud of the city of Freiburg, which we labeled in parts manually. The extensive evaluation shows that our method yields performance on par with, or even better than, complex state-of-the-art methods on all datasets. Furthermore, we provide results suggesting that in the context of point clouds the annotated area can be a more meaningful measure for active learning algorithms than the number of annotated points.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".