What was read
Counts are of items the extraction emitted, not of items
present on the sheet. The gap between the two is what the overlay is for.
Could not be placed
openings outside their own wall
0 of 0
openings with no schedule mark 0 of 0
openings with no position or width
0 of 0
named rooms with no wall cycle
0 of 0
schedule rows on this sheet 0
An opening with no mark cannot be joined to the door and window schedule, so its size, type and head height stay unknown however good the geometry is. A room name with no wall cycle has no coordinate in this schema, so it cannot be drawn on the sheet at all — the name was read, the position was not. The flag-dot layer starts off: 3008 markers at fit zoom hide the drawing rather than direct the eye. The counts above carry the same information without the noise.
What the colours claim Openings and site regions carry their own reasons, listed above — an opening outside its wall or without a class is a defect in the extraction, not a low score.
Reader confidence — a run-length bucket, not a placement score
The reader's own score for every wall it emitted. Walls
left of the 0.70 line are drawn as SHORT OR FRAGMENTED
RUNS on the sheet — the runs most likely to be a jamb return rather than a
wall. That is what this colour claims, and it is all it claims.
no wall carries a confidence value
Site take-off regions 2951 (430 closed, 2521 open outlines)
planting 33 of 207 with a species
take-off measured not-the-design-zone
printed by M Hudson 5604 sf
reader union, clipped 2782.9 sf (x0.4966)
our closed-area sum 39470.9 sf
a naive sum double-counts nested and overlapping regions, so it reads HIGH by construction; the reader's clipped union is the comparable figure
these areas are NOT the site not-the-design-zone
NONE of the 207 planting symbols fall inside the chosen ring, so it does not enclose the design. On the Davis master plan this ring is the Lot Coverage Graphic's own key diagram, and the figure reproduces MHD's coverage shading against MHD's printed table on the SAME sheet by the SAME author — an internal-consistency check, NOT an independent measurement of the design's hardscape. Do NOT quote `ratio_to_printed` as extraction accuracy against ground truth, and do NOT clip design geometry to `lot_area_sqft`. The ratio above must not be quoted as accuracy.
Rendered coverage
drawn / present
3158 / 3158
(100.0%)
site regions 2951 / 2951
planting 207 / 207
Interior is out of scope from 2026-08-09, so `spaces` has
left the denominator. Any coverage change from that is scope-driven, not
an improvement.
Scale
factor 0.08333333333333333 ft per dwg-unit
samples surviving outlier rejection
not reported by this reader
residual
11.098074
basis dwg-native
samples 2
dim text sheet len implied 15.0' 14.87840126754705 1.00817284 39.7' 39.58099067796726 1.00300673
Registration
transform synthetic stand-in — fitted to the plan extent
px per ft 0.3931
plan on sheet
no walls to place
Unresolved — from the reader (6)
converter output repaired IPBS (dwg2dxf -> dxf_sanitize) 0 desynchronising embedded newlines rejoined; 20 of 108075 entities DROPPED for uninitialised-memory field values (denormal or >1e12 planar coordinates). Dropped, not repaired — a clamped value would have placed a real-looking feature at a fabricated location. Detail in IPBS.sanitize.json block-nested geometry IPBS recovered 150 closed regions from inside block definitions ({'structures': 117, 'hardscape': 18, 'water': 15}), composed through each INSERT's position/rotation/scale. Tagged `block-nested:<block>` and EXCLUDED from the area take-off: blocks such as 26-023-EXISTING HARDSCAPE and 26-023-ADJACENT PROPERRTY are existing or off-property and are not the design's proposed hardscape. hardscape area IPBS: 2120 open polylines polyline on a hardscape layer is not closed, so it bounds no area; counted as a region but area left null rather than force-closed region area precision IPBS: 131 arc regions areas include exact circular-segment corrections for polyline bulges; HATCH elliptical edges are approximated by their centre point only planting species IPBS: 37 inserts block insert on a planting layer carries no attribute and no botanical block name; species left null rather than guessed walls/spaces/schedule IPBS intentionally empty — this is a landscape sheet, not a building sheet; site geometry is in the additive `site` block Assumed — added downstream (7)
grading carried as 2D only 1 of 1 contours elevation_ft is null, so there is no Z; a surface built from these would be fabricated grading carried as 2D only 1 of 1 contours elevation_ft is null, so there is no Z; a surface built from these would be fabricated open regions emitted as curves, not areas 2521 of 2951 site regions the drawing outlines these rather than closing them; forcing them shut to make a solid would invent an area the source does not state planting canopy radius (assumed) 70 of 207 symbols canopy_radius_ft is null; markers use the stated defaults {'tree': 8.0, 'shrub': 2.0, None: 2.0} ft by kind. These are position markers, not modelled plants area taken from the reader, not re-derived 138 region(s) with arc bulges area_sqft already carries the exact circular-segment correction; re-deriving from vertices as straight chords would disagree on every curved edge planting with no species 174 of 207 symbols no botanical name resolved from the block or the Land F/X schedule; the position is real, the identification is not no lot boundary used site.takeoff the reader reports measures='not-the-design-zone', not 'design': the ring its take-off chose does not belong to the design. Nothing is clipped, and ratio_to_printed must not be quoted as accuracy
