MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002552825 · doi:10.2747/1548-1603.47.3.321

Using Stereo Satellite Imagery for Topographic and Transportation Applications: An Accuracy Assessment

2010· article· en· W2002552825 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ahmed Shaker, Wai Yeung Yan, Said M. Easa

Bibliographic record

VenueGIScience & Remote Sensing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemote sensingPhotogrammetrySatelliteDigital elevation modelTerrainOrthophotoComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionGeographyElevation (ballistics)PixelAffine transformationSatellite imageryCartographyMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The launch of the Very High Resolution (VHR) sensor satellites has paved the way for further exploitation of the capabilities of satellite stereo imaging for many applications. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the level of accuracy that can be achieved by using stereo satellite images for different applications involving significantly different types of terrain. Three mathematical models for satellite sensor modeling are used: Rational Function Model (RFM), 3D polynomial model, and 3D affine model. Three stereo pairs of image datasets are tested from different satellites for different areas: (a) Indian Remote Sensing (IRS)-1D stereo images for topographic mapping and digital terrain elevation modeling for an area in Egypt; (b) IKONOS stereo images for highway alignments extraction in Toronto, Canada; and (c) IKONOS stereo images for topographic mapping and geometric parameter extraction for highway alignments in Hong Kong, China. The accuracy was evaluated by comparing the results of the data extracted using stereo satellite images and those extracted from conventional techniques, including Global Positioning System, field measurements, and aerial photogrammetry. The accuracy of the extracted features was found to be within a pixel-level. The results of this paper should be of interest to professionals from different disciplines exploring the use and accuracy of satellite stereo images for topographic and transportation applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGIScience & Remote SensingSame topicSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryFrench-language works237,207