MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056538823 · doi:10.1117/12.603728

The complementary nature of triangulation and ladar technologies

2005· article· en· W2056538823 on OpenAlexaff
Chad English, Adam Deslauriers, I. Christie

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsNeptec Design Group (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRangingTriangulationRendezvousLidarComputer visionArtificial intelligenceLaser rangingRange (aeronautics)Position (finance)Collision avoidanceRemote sensingCollisionLaserAerospace engineeringOpticsGeologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D ranging and imaging technology is generally divided into time-based (ladar) and position-based (triangulation) approaches. Traditionally ladar has been applied to long range, low precision applications and triangulation has been used for short range, high precision applications. Measurement speed and precision of both technologies have improved such that ladars are viable at shorter ranges and triangulation is viable at longer ranges. These improvements have produced an overlap of technologies for short to mid-range applications. This paper investigates the two sets of technologies to demonstrate their complementary nature particularly with respect to space and terrestrial applications such as vehicle inspection, navigation, collision avoidance, and rendezvous & docking.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207