[dead]
Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
71–80 of 108 posts
Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#72[flagged]
This is spam.
Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#73Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#74Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried this out like a week ago and I was wondering the same so I tried to upload and... it's definitely uploading crap. I don't know what to tell you but all the clearly square ones I saw have bends on the straight lines It's useful for finding ones that haven't been mapped but not for drawing them. It can get the 4 corners pretty accurate for pools that are square, many are half round at the ends though
Hi, sorry if the project or narrative gave the wrong impression but my idea was to show the potential, not providing a polished solution. As disclaimed in the demo and code, the example model was trained only with data from Galicia on a Google Colab. A robust enough models would require more data and compute. > it's definitely uploading crap. What was uploaded was what a human approved. > It's useful for finding ones…
> What was uploaded was what a human approved.
Yes, I hit approve on the best one because I was curious to see the actual final polygon. (I then went and fixed it.) You wrote above / I was responding to:
>> This is a because the polygon is drawn as a mask in order to overlay it on the image. The actual polygon being uploaded doesn't have the wobbly features.
Now you're saying it's my fault for selecting a wonky outline. What's it gonna be, is the preview bad or the resulting polygons? (And the reviewer is bad for approving anything at all?)
> my idea was to show the potential, not providing a polished solution
I can appreciate that, but if you're aware of this then it shouldn't have a button that unauthenticated users can press to upload the result to the production database. OSM has testing infrastructure if you want to also demo that part (https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ is a version I found on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/API_v0.6)
Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi, thanks for the feedback. I have disabled the hosted demo for now, and will remove the uploading part from the code in favor of showing an URL that will open the editor at the location. If its of any help, you can find any contributed polygon with the tag `created_by= https://github.com/mozilla-ai/osm-ai-helper `. Feel free to remove all of them (or I can do it myself once I access a PC). I will be happy to contin…
Hi, thanks for replying! I was looking at your source code, and wondering how easy it would be to create a .osm file instead of uploading the data. The JOSM editor’s todo list plugin would make it easy to plough through all the polygons or centroids, and do any refinement necessary. For example, I’m curious to try this out to detect crosswalks, and those need to be glued to the highway being crossed.
> and wondering how easy it would be to create a .osm file instead of uploading the data. The JOSM editor’s todo list plugin would make it easy to plough through all the polygons or centroids, and do any refinement necessary. For example, I’m curious to try this out to detect crosswalks, and those need to be glued to the highway being crossed.
Hi, I didn't know about this possibility. I should have better researched what were the different options. I will be taking a look on implementing this approach.
Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it isn't.
Yes it is.
And this is why we can't have good spam filters: people will flag anything unwanted as spam, no matter if they signed up for it a while ago (like a newsletter email), or didn't enjoy a comment related to AI on an AI comment thread (like here). Wikipedia adds that spam also typically has a commercial, or otherwise prohibited, purpose
Not saying this shouldn't be flagged ("Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead." this arguably meets that bar in low effort and low value/quality), but it's not spam if they aren't pasting it indiscriminately to many places for some illegitimate purpose
Speaking of which, welles-nietes replies (what's that in English, »"yes it is, no it isn't"-replies« perhaps? Or a »yes-no argument«? I tried a translator and chatgpt but neither gave options that seem correct) are at about the same level, no?
Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#78Wait, we are not mapping things we see in sattelite images, we are mapping things that have ground truth.
Please do not contribute anything ai-fantasized
Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#79Oh, great re swimming pools - solar detection is another one on my list to have a go at. I feel like a lot of the pushback here is an idea that OSM can grow from hand mapping; but as someone with 60k changesets over a decade... no amount of human volunteer enthusiasm is to the point that it can "solve" mapping at a global scale to the standards that make the map data overwhelmingly useful. I feel we need a scalable f…
Solar might be problematic. How will you discern between a solar panel and a solar thermal collector? They look practically the same but their function is very different.
Re: Map Features in OpenStreetMap with Computer Vision
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi, sorry if the project or narrative gave the wrong impression but my idea was to show the potential, not providing a polished solution. As disclaimed in the demo and code, the example model was trained only with data from Galicia on a Google Colab. A robust enough models would require more data and compute. > it's definitely uploading crap. What was uploaded was what a human approved. > It's useful for finding ones…
> What was uploaded was what a human approved. Yes, I hit approve on the best one because I was curious to see the actual final polygon. (I then went and fixed it.) You wrote above / I was responding to: >> This is a because the polygon is drawn as a mask in order to overlay it on the image. The actual polygon being uploaded doesn't have the wobbly features. Now you're saying it's my fault for selecting a wonky outli…
> You wrote above / I was responding to:
I apologize. I read `it's uploading` and misunderstood like you were saying the tool itself was uploading things.
> is the preview bad or the resulting polygons? (And the reviewer is bad for approving anything at all?)
It can be one, the other, or both.
I was replying to a reference about a specific example in the blog post.
In that example, I see wobbly features due to rendering alongside the edges that make it look like the polygon is going to have dozens of nodes. Then, there is an over-simplification of the polygon around the top-right corner (which I didn't consider an error based on my criteria from reviewing manually created pools).
> And the reviewer is bad for approving anything at all?
I didn't say that. I was trying to assert that the UI/X can be improved to better show what will be uploaded.
> but if you're aware of this then it shouldn't have a button that unauthenticated users can press to upload the result to the production database
You are right. I was manually reviewing the profile created for the demo every day, but I didn't realize the impact/reach until I saw the first comments here. As soon as I read the first comment, I shut down the demo.
As I said in other comments, I will make alternative changes to the demo.
> if you want to also demo that part (https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ is a version I found on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/API_v0.6)
Thanks for the suggestion, I don't know why I didn't thought about that earlier.