Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of DBSCAN
Fig. 2. Flow chart of point cloud filtering algorithm based on density clustering
Fig. 3. Simulation map of laser point cloud position in large survey area
Fig. 4. 3D view of S53
Fig. 5. Elevation map of S53
Fig. 6. Filtering result map of S53
Fig. 7. Error point location map of S53
Fig. 8. Relief image after filtering of S53
Fig. 9. Section plane comparison diagram of S53
Fig. 10. Schematic diagram of classification error
Fig. 11. 3D view of S61
Fig. 12. Elevation map of S61
Fig. 13. Filtering result map of S61
Fig. 14. Error point location map of S61
Fig. 15. Relief image after filtering of S61
Fig. 16. Section plane comparison diagram of S61
Fig. 17. 3D view of S21
Fig. 18. Filtering result map of S21
Fig. 19. Relief image after filtering of S21
Fig. 20. Error point location map of S21
Fig. 21. Mutation point location map of S21
Fig. 22. Re-division result map of S21
Fig. 23. Relief image before filtering of S24
Fig. 24. Elevation map of S24
Fig. 25. Filtering result map of S24
Fig. 26. Error point location map of S24
Fig. 27. Relief image after filtering of S24
Fig. 28. Section plane comparison diagram of S24
Fig. 29. 3D view of S71
Fig. 30. Filtering result map of S71
Fig. 31. Relief image after filtering of S71
Fig. 32. Error point location map of S71
Fig. 33. Mutation point location map of S71
Fig. 34. Re-division result map of S71
Reference point | Filtered point | Quantitative evaluation index |
---|
Ground points | Non-ground points | Type Ⅰ(TⅠ) | Type Ⅱ(TⅡ) | Total(TE) |
---|
Ground points | a | b | b/(a+b) | c/(c+d) | (b+c)/(a+b+c+d) | Non-ground points | c | d |
|
Table 1. Definition of filtering error
Sample | TⅠ | TⅡ | TE |
---|
S53 | 15.40 | 24.91 | 15.78 |
|
Table 2. Filter error statistics of S53
Sample | Elmqvist | Sohn | Axelsson | Pfeifer | Brovelli | Roggero | Wack | Sithole | Mean | Proposed algorithm |
---|
S53 | 48.45 | 20.19 | 8.91 | 12.60 | 52.81 | 17.29 | 27.24 | 37.07 | 28.07 | 15.78 |
|
Table 3. Comparison of S53 total filtering error with other filtering algorithms
Sample | TⅠ | TⅡ | TE |
---|
S61 | 5.56 | 15.84 | 5.91 |
|
Table 4. Filter error statistics of S61
Sample | Elmqvist | Sohn | Axelsson | Pfeifer | Brovelli | Roggero | Wack | Sithole | Mean | Proposed algorithm |
---|
S61 | 35.87 | 2.99 | 2.08 | 6.91 | 21.68 | 18.99 | 13.47 | 21.63 | 15.45 | 5.91 |
|
Table 5. Comparison of S61 total filtering error with other filtering algorithms
Sample | TⅠ | TⅡ | TE |
---|
S21 | 0.43 | 11.72 | 2.93 |
|
Table 6. Filter error statistics of S21
Sample | Elmqvist | Sohn | Axelsson | Pfeifer | Brovelli | Roggero | Wack | Sithole | Mean | Proposed algorithm |
---|
S21 | 8.53 | 8.80 | 4.25 | 2.57 | 9.30 | 9.84 | 4.55 | 7.76 | 6.95 | 2.93 |
|
Table 7. Comparison of S21 total filtering error with other filtering algorithms
Sample | TⅠ | TⅡ | TE |
---|
S24 | 10.49 | 14.92 | 11.71 |
|
Table 8. Filter error statistics of S24
Sample | Elmqvist | Sohn | Axelsson | Pfeifer | Brovelli | Roggero | Wack | Sithole | Mean | Proposed algorithm |
---|
S24 | 13.83 | 13.33 | 4.42 | 8.64 | 36.06 | 23.25 | 11.53 | 25.28 | 17.04 | 11.71 |
|
Table 9. Comparison of S24 total filtering error with other filtering algorithms
Sample | TⅠ | TⅡ | TE |
---|
S71 | 15.26 | 10.17 | 14.68 |
|
Table 10. Filter error statistics of S71
Sample | Elmqvist | Sohn | Axelsson | Pfeifer | Brovelli | Roggero | Wack | Sithole | Mean | Proposed algorithm |
---|
S71 | 34.22 | 2.20 | 1.63 | 8.85 | 34.98 | 5.11 | 16.97 | 21.83 | 15.72 | 14.68 |
|
Table 11. Comparison of S53 total filtering error with other filtering algorithms