Cited by 183D Shape Modeling and Analysis3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Incremental and Enhanced Scanline-Based Segmentation Method for Surface Reconstruction of Sparse LiDAR Data

Open access

Abstract

The segmentation of point clouds is an important aspect of automated processing tasks such as semantic extraction. However, the sparsity and non-uniformity of the point clouds gathered by the popular 3D mobile LiDAR devices pose many challenges for existing segmentation methods. To improve the segmentation results of point clouds from mobile LiDAR devices, we propose an optimized segmentation method based on Scanline Continuity Constraint (SLCC) in this work. Unlike conventional scanline-based segmentation methods, SLCC clusters scanlines using the continuity constraints in terms of the distance as well as the direction of two consecutive points. In addition, scanline clusters are agglomerated not only into primitive geometrical shapes but also irregular shapes. Another downside to existing segmentation methods is that they are not capable of incremental processing. This causes unnecessary memory and time consumption for applications that require frame-wise segmentation or when new point clouds are added. In order to address this, we propose an incremental scheme—the Incremental Recursive Segmentation (IRIS), that can be easily applied to any segmentation method. IRIS is achieved by combining the segments of newly added point clouds and the previously segmented results. Furthermore, as an example application, we construct a processing pipeline consisting of plane fitting and surface reconstruction using the segmentation results. Finally, we evaluate the proposed methods on th…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/rs8110967

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Rabbani, 2006, Segmentation of point clouds using smoothness constraint, ISPRS Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci., 36, 248
  2. Oehler, B., Stueckler, J., Welle, J., Schulz, D., and Behnke, S. (2011). Intelligent Robotics and Applications, Springer.
  3. Segal, A., Haehnel, D., and Thrun, S. (July, January 28). Generalized-ICP. Proceedings of the Robotics: Science and Systems V, Seattle, WA, USA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 18

Metadata

Authors
Wang, W., Sakurada, K., & Kawaguchi, N.
Affiliations
  • Nagoya University (JP)
  • Institutes of Innovation for Future Society, Nagoya University (JP)
Corresponding author
Wang, Weimin
Venue
Remote Sensing
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2016-11-22
Volume
8
Issue
11
Pages
967
ISSN
2072-4292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2552088091
Cited by
16
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Remote Sensing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geology › 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Keywords
point cloud segmentation, mobile laser scanning, sparse point clouds, recursive segmentation, surface reconstruction, plane fitting, 3D point clouds

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review