Comparison of Single and Multi-Scale Method for Leaf and Wood Points Classification from Terrestrial Laser Scanning Data

Abstract. The classification of leaf and wood points is an essential preprocessing step for extracting inventory measurements and canopy characterization of trees from the terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) data. The geometry-based approach is one of the widely used classification method. In the geometry-based method, it is common practice to extract salient features at one single scale before the features are used for classification. It remains unclear how different scale(s) used affect the classification accuracy and efficiency. To assess the scale effect on the classification accuracy and efficiency, we extracted the single-scale and multi-scale salient features from the point clouds of two oak trees of different sizes and conducted the classification on leaf and wood. Our experimental results show that the balanced accuracy of the multi-scale method is higher than the average balanced accuracy of the single-scale method by about 10 % for both trees. The average speed-up ratio of single scale classifiers over multi-scale classifier for each tree is higher than 30.

[1]  Di Wang,et al.  FEASIBILITY OF MACHINE LEARNING METHODS FOR SEPARATING WOOD ANDLEAF POINTS FROM TERRESTRIAL LASER SCANNING DATA , 2017 .

[2]  Martial Hebert,et al.  Natural terrain classification using three‐dimensional ladar data for ground robot mobility , 2006, J. Field Robotics.

[3]  Lin Cao,et al.  A Novel Approach for Retrieving Tree Leaf Area from Ground-Based LiDAR , 2016, Remote. Sens..

[4]  N. Pfeifer,et al.  INVESTIGATING TERRESTRIAL LASER SCANNING INTENSITY DATA : QUALITY AND FUNCTIONAL RELATIONS , 2007 .

[5]  Rahul Sukthankar,et al.  Classification of plant structures from uncalibrated image sequences , 2012, 2012 IEEE Workshop on the Applications of Computer Vision (WACV).

[6]  M. Fournier,et al.  The use of terrestrial LiDAR technology in forest science: application fields, benefits and challenges , 2011, Annals of Forest Science.

[7]  Martin Pfennigbauer,et al.  Improving quality of laser scanning data acquisition through calibrated amplitude and pulse deviation measurement , 2010, Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[8]  Stefan Hinz,et al.  Semantic point cloud interpretation based on optimal neighborhoods, relevant features and efficient classifiers , 2015 .

[9]  Michael Weinmann,et al.  A Classification-Segmentation Framework for the Detection of Individual Trees in Dense MMS Point Cloud Data Acquired in Urban Areas , 2017, Remote. Sens..

[10]  Guang Zheng,et al.  Improved Salient Feature-Based Approach for Automatically Separating Photosynthetic and Nonphotosynthetic Components Within Terrestrial Lidar Point Cloud Data of Forest Canopies , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[11]  Dimitri Lague,et al.  3D Terrestrial LiDAR data classification of complex natural scenes using a multi-scale dimensionality criterion: applications in geomorphology , 2011, ArXiv.

[12]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[13]  Boris Jutzi,et al.  Feature relevance assessment for the semantic interpretation of 3D point cloud data , 2013 .

[14]  Ze He,et al.  Estimating Leaf Area Density of Individual Trees Using the Point Cloud Segmentation of Terrestrial LiDAR Data and a Voxel-Based Model , 2017, Remote. Sens..

[15]  J. Suomalainen,et al.  Full waveform hyperspectral LiDAR for terrestrial laser scanning. , 2012, Optics express.

[16]  Q. Guo,et al.  A geometric method for wood-leaf separation using terrestrial and simulated Lidar data , 2015 .

[17]  Jasmine Muir,et al.  Evaluation of the Range Accuracy and the Radiometric Calibration of Multiple Terrestrial Laser Scanning Instruments for Data Interoperability , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[18]  D. Baldocchi,et al.  On seeing the wood from the leaves and the role of voxel size in determining leaf area distribution of forests with terrestrial LiDAR , 2014 .