MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

3D CATENARY CURVE FITTING FOR GEOMETRIC CALIBRATION

2012· article· en· W2011460883 on OpenAlexafffund
Ting On Chan, Derek D. Lichti

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCatenaryPoint cloudCalibrationCurve fittingComputer scienceGeometric modelingAlgorithmMathematicsGeometryArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In modern road surveys, hanging power cables are among the most commonly-found geometric features. These cables are catenary curves that are conventionally modelled with three parameters in 2D Cartesian space. With the advent and popularity of the mobile mapping system (MMS), the 3D point clouds of hanging power cables can be captured within a short period of time. These point clouds, similarly to those of planar features, can be used for feature-based self-calibration of the system assembly errors of an MMS. However, to achieve this, a well-defined 3D equation for the catenary curve is needed. This paper proposes three 3D catenary curve models, each having different parameters. The models are examined by least squares fitting of simulated data and real data captured with an MMS. The outcome of the fitting is investigated in terms of the residuals and correlation matrices. Among the proposed models, one of them could estimate the parameters accurately and without any extreme correlation between the variables. This model can also be applied to those transmission lines captured by airborne laser scanning or any other hanging cable-like objects.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207