MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078819097 · doi:10.1109/aim.2014.6878334

Introduction of a LIDAR-based obstacle detection system on the LineScout power line robot

2014· article· en· W2078819097 on OpenAlexafffund
Pierre-Luc Richard, Nicolas Pouliot, Serge Montambault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Line Inspection Robots
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
FundersHydro-Québec
KeywordsObstacleLidarRobotLine (geometry)Power (physics)Computer scienceSpan (engineering)SIGNAL (programming language)Range (aeronautics)Remote sensingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionEngineeringAerospace engineeringPhysicsGeologyGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a sequel of an earlier paper that featured a thorough characterization of the Hokuyo UTM-30LX laser range finder, which showed promise for a specific application: allowing a power line robot to detect obstacles in its path. After a quick summary of the earlier conclusions, this paper pushes the validation farther by assessing for the first time this popular LIDAR's performance when subjected to the particularly challenging, outdoor, power line environmental conditions: large temperature range, changes in lighting, strong magnetic fields, and oscillating or vibrating targets. Use of return signal intensity, predictably affected by the angle of incidence on the target and by target surface finish, is also investigated as a means to detect variations due to an obstacle. Scanning results with LineScout traveling at maximum speed on a full-scale power line span are then analyzed to validate the proposed detection thresholds.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations35
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Line Inspection RobotsFrench-language works237,207