Suppr超能文献

利用 ATSS 深度学习方法在航空正射影像中定位电力杆。

Mapping Utility Poles in Aerial Orthoimages Using ATSS Deep Learning Method.

机构信息

Faculty of Engineering, Architecture and Urbanism and Geography, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande 79070900, Brazil.

Faculty of Computer Science, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande 79070900, Brazil.

出版信息

Sensors (Basel). 2020 Oct 26;20(21):6070. doi: 10.3390/s20216070.

Abstract

Mapping utility poles using side-view images acquired with car-mounted cameras is a time-consuming task, mainly in larger areas due to the need for street-by-street surveying. Aerial images cover larger areas and can be feasible alternatives although the detection and mapping of the utility poles in urban environments using top-view images is challenging. Thus, we propose the use of Adaptive Training Sample Selection (ATSS) for detecting utility poles in urban areas since it is a novel method and has not yet investigated in remote sensing applications. Here, we compared ATSS with Faster Region-based Convolutional Neural Networks (Faster R-CNN) and Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection (RetinaNet ), currently used in remote sensing applications, to assess the performance of the proposed methodology. We used 99,473 patches of 256 × 256 pixels with ground sample distance (GSD) of 10 cm. The patches were divided into training, validation and test datasets in approximate proportions of 60%, 20% and 20%, respectively. As the utility pole labels are point coordinates and the object detection methods require a bounding box, we assessed the influence of the bounding box size on the ATSS method by varying the dimensions from 30×30 to 70×70 pixels. For the proposal task, our findings show that ATSS is, on average, 5% more accurate than Faster R-CNN and RetinaNet. For a bounding box size of 40×40, we achieved Average Precision with intersection over union of 50% (AP50) of 0.913 for ATSS, 0.875 for Faster R-CNN and 0.874 for RetinaNet. Regarding the influence of the bounding box size on ATSS, our results indicate that the AP50 is about 6.5% higher for 60×60 compared to 30×30. For AP75, this margin reaches 23.1% in favor of the 60×60 bounding box size. In terms of computational costs, all the methods tested remain at the same level, with an average processing time around of 0.048 s per patch. Our findings show that ATSS outperforms other methodologies and is suitable for developing operation tools that can automatically detect and map utility poles.

摘要

利用车载相机获取的侧视图像来定位电线杆是一项耗时的任务,尤其是在较大的区域,因为需要进行逐街调查。航空图像覆盖更大的区域,并且可以作为可行的替代方案,尽管使用顶视图图像检测和定位城市环境中的电线杆具有挑战性。因此,我们提出使用自适应训练样本选择 (ATSS) 来检测城市地区的电线杆,因为它是一种新方法,并且尚未在遥感应用中进行研究。在这里,我们将 ATSS 与 Faster Region-based Convolutional Neural Networks (Faster R-CNN) 和 Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection (RetinaNet ) 进行了比较,这两种方法目前都用于遥感应用,以评估所提出方法的性能。我们使用了 99473 个 256×256 像素的补丁,地面采样距离 (GSD) 为 10 厘米。这些补丁分别以大约 60%、20%和 20%的比例分为训练、验证和测试数据集。由于电线杆标签是点坐标,而目标检测方法需要一个边界框,因此我们通过将边界框的尺寸从 30×30 到 70×70 像素来评估边界框大小对 ATSS 方法的影响。对于提案任务,我们的发现表明,ATSS 的平均准确率比 Faster R-CNN 和 RetinaNet 高 5%。对于 40×40 的边界框大小,我们实现了平均精度与交集的 50%(AP50),ATSS 为 0.913,Faster R-CNN 为 0.875,RetinaNet 为 0.874。关于边界框大小对 ATSS 的影响,我们的结果表明,与 30×30 相比,60×60 的 AP50 高约 6.5%。对于 AP75,60×60 边界框大小的优势达到 23.1%。在计算成本方面,所有测试的方法都保持在同一水平,每个补丁的平均处理时间约为 0.048 秒。我们的发现表明,ATSS 优于其他方法,适用于开发可以自动检测和定位电线杆的操作工具。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/854a/7663448/5bbba564e929/sensors-20-06070-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验