Computational study demonstrates improved architectural floor plan segmentation using axis-aware feature recalibration, indicating higher accuracy for automated drawing analysis.
Automatic semantic parsing of architectural floor plans provides a two-dimensional semantic layer for building information modeling (BIM)-related workflows, intelligent plan checking, renovation, and large-scale drawing management. Unlike natural images, floor plans contain sparse textures, dense linework, small architectural symbols, and strong axis-aligned geometric regularities. These properties make conventional segmentation networks vulnerable to small-symbol dilution during downsampling, noisy skip-feature fusion, and fragmented predictions along long wall boundaries. Inspired by principles of hierarchical visual processing, selective attention, and spatial encoding, this study presents PCP-Net, an end-to-end Planar Component Parsing Network for room, icon, and boundary-aware floor plan parsing. PCP-Net uses a Grouped Residual Encoder to extract multi-scale local patterns, a Cross-Scale Feature Recalibration (CSFR) pipeline to recalibrate skip features through Adaptive Channel Gating, Spatial Response Amplification, and Axis-Decompositional Positional Embedding, and a Structural Gradient Propagation branch to provide training-time boundary regularization. Experiments on CubiCasa5K and three external datasets (R3D, CVC-FP, and ROBIN) evaluate PCP-Net under in-domain and zero-shot cross-domain protocols. On CubiCasa5K, PCP-Net attains 71.3% mIoU, 90.1% overall accuracy, and 78.9% mean accuracy; in the current ablation setting, ADPE improves mIoU by 0.8 percentage points over the ADPE-ablated configuration. These results indicate that cross-scale feature recalibration with axis-aware positional cues can improve floor plan semantic parsing within the evaluated datasets and pixel-level metrics, while downstream BIM generation still requires additional vectorization, topology graph construction, and attribute extraction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: