4.7 Article

Measuring human perceptions of a large-scale urban region using machine learning

期刊

LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING
卷 180, 期 -, 页码 148-160

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.08.020

关键词

Urban perception; Place semantics; Street-level imagery; Deep learning; Built environment

资金

  1. National Key RAMP
  2. D Program of China [2017YFB0503602]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41671378, 41625003]
  4. Hong Kong Research Grants Council under GRF [14606715]
  5. MIT SENSEable City Lab Consortium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Measuring the human sense of place and quantifying the connections among the visual features of the built environment that impact the human sense of place have long been of interest to a wide variety of fields. Previous studies have relied on low-throughput surveys and limited data sources, which have difficulty in measuring the human perception of a large-scale urban region at flexible spatial resolutions. In this work, a data-driven machine learning approach is proposed to measure how people perceive a place in a large-scale urban region. Specifically, a deep learning model, which has been trained on millions of human ratings of street-level imagery, was used to predict human perceptions of a street view image. The model achieved a high accuracy rate in predicting six human perceptual indicators, namely, safe, lively, beautiful, wealthy, depressing, and boring. This model can help to map the distribution of the city-wide human perception for a new urban region. Furthermore, a series of statistical analyses was conducted to determine the visual elements that may cause a place to be perceived as different perceptions. From the 150 object categories segmented from the street view images, various objects were identified as being positively or negatively correlated with each of the six perceptual indicators. The results take researchers and urban planners one step toward understanding the interactions of the place sentiments and semantics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据