Infrared and Laser Engineering, Volume. 52, Issue 11, 20230212(2023)

Airborne LiDAR data classification method combining physical and geometric characteristics

Yiqiang Zhao1,2, Qi Zhang1,2, Changlong Liu3,4, Weikang Wu3,4, and Yao Li1,2、*
Author Affiliations
  • 1School of Microelectronics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
  • 2Tianjin Key Laboratory of Imaging and Sensing Microelectronic Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
  • 3Microsystem Center, The 54st Institute of China Electronics Technology Group Corporation, Shijiazhuang 050081, China
  • 4National Engineering Research Center for Communication Software and Special Integrated Circuit Design, Shijiazhuang 050081, China
  • show less
    Figures & Tables(12)
    Different LiDAR irradiation situations. (a) Plane perpendicular to LiDAR beam; (b) Inclined plane; (c) Multiple targets
    Structure of FW and FF block. (a) Structure of FW block; (b) Structure of FF block
    Principle of mapping matrix
    Local neighborhood feature enhancement. (a) Local neighborhood fully connected structure; (b) Structure of LE block
    Network architecture
    Full-waveform of sampling points of different categories. (a) Ground full-waveform; (b) Vegetation full-waveform; (c) Building full-waveform; (d) Power line full-waveform; (e) Transmission tower full-waveform; (f) Street path full-waveform
    Visualization of classification results. (a) Input data; (b) Classification results of FWNet2; (c) Classification results of proposed method; (d) Real category label
    • Table 1. Dataset distribution

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 1. Dataset distribution

      LabelClassTrainTest
      NumberNumber
      1Ground178735220.4%19307018.1%
      2Vegetation471963453.9%76532771.7%
      3Building151448617.3%491384.6%
      4Power line719780.8%81520.8%
      5Transmission tower320080.4%18290.2%
      6Street path6336067.2%495804.6%
    • Table 2. Quantitative comparison of different methods

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 2. Quantitative comparison of different methods

      MethodMetricGroundVegetationBuildingPower lineTransmission tower Street pathMean
      CNN[14]Precision0.600.960.070.100.010.180.32
      Recall0.180.780.110.880.440.600.50
      F1 score 0.280.860.090.190.020.280.28
      FCN[14]Precision0.790.950.990.980.630.670.84
      Recall0.840.970.930.910.880.690.87
      F1 score 0.810.960.960.940.730.680.85
      PointNet[9]Precision0.560.970.950.920.610.940.83
      Recall0.910.850.830.840.480.620.76
      F1 score 0.690.910.880.880.530.750.77
      PointNet++[10]Precision0.560.980.990.970.520.960.83
      Recall0.930.850.850.850.660.600.83
      F1 score 0.700.910.910.910.580.740.80
      GFSAE[13]Precision0.770.970.930.960.700.830.86
      Recall0.900.950.930.930.730.620.84
      F1 score 0.830.960.930.940.710.710.85
      RandLA-Net[11]Precision0.740.980.830.930.810.990.88
      Recall0.950.930.950.970.670.600.85
      F1 score 0.830.950.890.950.730.750.85
      GACNN[12]Precision0.760.980.870.950.740.940.87
      Recall0.950.940.950.980.790.630.87
      F1 score 0.840.960.910.960.760.750.86
      FWNet2[16]Precision0.800.980.990.990.990.970.95
      Recall0.940.960.950.990.790.710.89
      F1 score 0.860.970.970.990.880.820.92
      Proposed methodPrecision0.830.980.980.990.970.980.96
      Recall0.950.960.950.990.820.750.90
      F1 score 0.890.970.960.990.890.850.92
    • Table 3. Ablation experiment on FF block

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 3. Ablation experiment on FF block

      ModelFW blockFusionMean precisionMean recallMean F1 score
      A×$\oplus $0.900.860.88
      B$\oplus $0.920.880.89
      C×0.940.890.90
      Proposed method0.960.900.92
    • Table 4. Ablation experiment on stacking layers of FW block

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 4. Ablation experiment on stacking layers of FW block

      ModelNumber of layersMean precisionMean recallMeanF1 score
      D10.940.890.91
      E20.950.900.91
      F30.960.900.92
      G40.950.890.91
    • Table 5. Ablation experiments on LE and GE block

      View table
      View in Article

      Table 5. Ablation experiments on LE and GE block

      ModelLEGEMean precisionMean recallMean F1 score
      LI blockAttention Pooling
      HMLPMax pooling0.910.860.88
      IMax pooling0.940.880.89
      JMLP0.920.880.89
      K×0.940.880.90
      Proposed method0.960.900.92
    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Yiqiang Zhao, Qi Zhang, Changlong Liu, Weikang Wu, Yao Li. Airborne LiDAR data classification method combining physical and geometric characteristics[J]. Infrared and Laser Engineering, 2023, 52(11): 20230212

    Download Citation

    EndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text
    Save article for my favorites
    Paper Information

    Category:

    Received: Apr. 10, 2023

    Accepted: --

    Published Online: Jan. 8, 2024

    The Author Email: Li Yao (liyao@tju.edu.cn)

    DOI:10.3788/IRLA20230212

    Topics