The objective of this section is not to consider the initial results produced by artificial intelligence as definitive; rather, it is to enable the user to visually review these results, verify them against a list, eliminate low-accuracy candidates, re-analyze using the remaining detections if necessary, and ultimately download DXF/PDF/PNG files.
1. Main Logic After Analysis
Upon analyzing an architectural plan, the system generates numerous candidate detections. These candidates may include doors, windows, walls, axis points, columns, curtain walls, stairs, elevator shafts, or other architectural structural elements. However, not every detection produced by artificial intelligence models can be deemed conclusively accurate. Therefore, the system provides the user with a control screen following the analysis.
This control screen consists of two primary areas:
• Visual Results List: Visual results displayed directly on the plan.
• Detection List: A tabular compilation of candidate elements identified by artificial intelligence.
This configuration allows the user to view not only the image but also the ID, type, confidence score, coordinates, size, and source of each candidate.
2. Visual Results Area
The “Visual Results” section, located in the lower left of the interface, presents the processed version of the analyzed architectural plan. In this area, the system renders detected elements directly onto the plan. Each candidate object is highlighted using colored lines, boxes, labels, or ID numbers.
The primary function of this section is to facilitate the user’s visual inspection of the system output. For example, if a window is misidentified as a door, the user can identify this error on the plan. Similarly, if a wall segment is incorrectly marked as an axis point, such discrepancies become readily apparent in the visual results display.
3. Detection List
Adjacent to the visual results, the “Detection List” section presents all candidate elements detected by the AI in a tabular format. This transparency enables the user to understand not only what the system has identified but also the confidence level associated with each detection. This list is essential for manual adjustments. The user can select and remove low-confidence candidates, correct misclassified elements, or restart the analysis using only the verified candidates.
4. Confidence Score Logic
A critical aspect of the system is the confidence score, expressed as a percentage, which indicates the AI’s level of certainty regarding each finding. Examples include:
• 96% confidence score: High certainty in the detection.
• 75% confidence score: Likely correct but requires verification.
• 45% confidence score: Questionable detection that may require removal or further investigation.
5. Removing Candidates Below the Threshold
In the upper left area of the interface, the “Remove Candidates Below the Score” function enables automated data refinement. The user specifies a percentage threshold, and the system eliminates all candidates with confidence scores below this value from the results list.
For example, if the threshold is set to 50:
• Candidates scoring below 50% are removed.
• Candidates scoring 50% and above are retained.
If the threshold is set to 70:
• A greater number of candidates below 70% are removed.
• The results become more selective and refined.
This feature is particularly beneficial in analyses with numerous false positives, as it allows the user to perform bulk removal without manually deleting each candidate.
6. Finding the Right Result Through Iteration
A key characteristic of the system is the user’s ability to refine results through iterative adjustments. The user is not confined to a single analysis outcome but can experiment with different threshold values, remove low-scoring candidates, retain selected elements manually, and rerun the analysis with the remaining detections.
A typical iterative workflow may include:
1. Initial system analysis is completed.
2. User reviews the results.
3. If excessive false detections exist, the user sets the threshold to 60%.
4. The system removes candidates below 60%.
5. User reassesses the visual output.
6. If necessary, manually deletes additional candidates.
7. User restarts analysis using "Run analysis with remaining elements."
8. A more accurate and refined result is achieved.
9. Final output is generated once the result meets satisfaction criteria.
This methodology transforms the system from a fully automated tool into a controlled, interactive, human-assisted analysis platform.
7. User Intervention and Manual Cleaning
The diagrammed structure demonstrates that user intervention is a fundamental element of the system. Users are not obligated to accept all candidates generated by the analysis.
Users should have the ability to:
• Delete incorrect detections.
• Remove low-scoring candidates in bulk.
• Select from a list.
• Select objects from visuals.
• Remove selected candidates from the plan.
• Re-analyze using the remaining accurate candidates.
This functionality is particularly important in architectural plans, as some drawings may exhibit significant similarities. For example, a thin wall line may be misinterpreted as an axis line, a door frame confused with a furniture line, and a window line mistaken for a wall section in certain plans. Therefore, achieving fully reliable results without user oversight is challenging.
8. Run Analysis with Remaining Elements
A key feature within the Detection list area is the “Run analysis with remaining detections” button. This function allows a new analysis to be performed exclusively with the candidates retained after user cleaning. This process is essential because:
• Incorrect candidates are excluded from the analysis.
• The system processes more precise data.
• The result engine leverages the refined dataset.
• The final output is more reliable.
This approach exemplifies a human-in-the-loop methodology within artificial intelligence systems. The system does not depend solely on automated machine decision-making but is enhanced through human supervision.
9. Conclusion Phase
The “Conclusion” block, centrally located in the diagram, processes the cleaned and validated findings to produce the final result. During the Conclusion phase, the system can:
• Evaluate the remaining candidates.
• Interpret the overall plan structure.
• Organize architectural elements into coherent layers.
• Prepare required data for output generation.
• Generate the final file structure for DXF, PDF, and PNG outputs.
It is important to note that the final result is not derived solely from the initial AI analysis. The outcome is shaped through user-driven cleaning and corrections, thereby integrating both AI predictions and user input.
10. DXF/PDF Download
Following the conclusion phase, users can download professional outputs. The “Download DXF/PDF” block in the diagram represents this step. At this stage, the system produces the following files:
• PDF: Report and visual result output.
• DXF: Technical drawing output compatible with CAD software.
• PNG: Processed visual plan output.
The DXF output is especially valuable for architects and engineers, as these files can be accessed in AutoCAD, DraftSight, LibreCAD, or similar CAD applications. Consequently, plans processed via artificial intelligence can be seamlessly transferred into technical drawing environments.
11. Generated Files Panel
The “Generated Files” panel, positioned on the right, enumerates all files created by the system. This panel enables users to open or download individual result files. The panel may include the following file types:
• Column and Shear Wall PNG
• Column PNG
• Shear Wall PNG
• PDF
• Column and Shear Wall DXF
• Candidate Column DXF
• Candidate Shear Wall DXF
This listing illustrates that the system produces multiple outputs, each serving a specific purpose.
Column and Shear Wall PNG provides a combined visual representation of all findings.
Column PNG visually isolates column candidates.
Shear Wall PNG archives the final display presented to the user.
PDF files are suited for reporting and distribution.
Full Plan DXF offers a comprehensive plan output viewable within a CAD environment.
Candidate Column DXF is a specialized technical output containing only column candidates.
Candidate Shear Wall DXF delivers a technical output comprising shear wall candidates.
This explanation is displayed under the third flow diagram according to the selected site language.