4.6 Article

Graph convolutional autoencoder model for the shape coding and cognition of buildings in maps

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13658816.2020.1768260

关键词

Shape coding; graph convolutional autoencoder (GCAE); spatial cognition; deep learning; vector building data

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41531180, 41871377]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFB0503500]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study develops an effective shape representation method for geospatial objects through a learning strategy and graph structure model. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed GCAE model excels in shape coding and shape distinction, outperforming existing methods.
The shape of a geospatial object is an important characteristic and a significant factor in spatial cognition. Existing shape representation methods for vector-structured objects in the map space are mainly based on geometric and statistical measures. Considering that shape is complicated and cognitively related, this study develops a learning strategy to combine multiple features extracted from its boundary and obtain a reasonable shape representation. Taking building data as example, this study first models the shape of a building using a graph structure and extracts multiple features for each vertex based on the local and regional structures. A graph convolutional autoencoder (GCAE) model comprising graph convolution and autoencoder architecture is proposed to analyze the modeled graph and realize shape coding through unsupervised learning. Experiments show that the GCAE model can produce a cognitively compliant shape coding, with the ability to distinguish different shapes. It outperforms existing methods in terms of similarity measurements. Furthermore, the shape coding is experimentally proven to be effective in representing the local and global characteristics of building shape in application scenarios such as shape retrieval and matching.

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

4.6
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