MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108762527 · doi:10.5589/m10-056

Investigating the effect of the deflection of the vertical on lidar observations

2010· article· en· W2108762527 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tristan Goulden, Chris Hopkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarDeflection (physics)GeodesyVertical deflectionGeographyGeologyGeometryPhysicsMathematicsRemote sensingOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractConsiderable materials have been generated that focus on the error analysis of light detection and ranging (lidar) derived coordinates through the direct georeferencing equation. One component of the equation, namely the deflection of the vertical (DOV), has been largely ignored within the literature. This rotational component serves to reconcile the ellipsoidal and local-level reference systems and is often considered to be insignificant. The sensitivity of lidar-derived coordinates to the deflection of the vertical was investigated through simulation. This is accomplished by deriving three-dimensional coordinates through the direct georeferencing equation and both ignoring and including the deflection of the vertical. Failure to consider this component was found to overcome commercially published horizontal accuracies at magnitudes of 34″, 35″, and 37″ for flying heights of 1000, 2000, and 3000 m, respectively, and vertical accuracies at 53″, 40″, and 35″ for flying heights of 1000, 2000, and 3000 m, respectively. Values of this magnitude are prevalent in mountainous environments and should not be ignored. Lastly, the unavoidable error existing in determinations of the deflection of the vertical was reported and was also determined to be significant with respect to the overall lidar error budget.Beaucoup de documentation a été générée concernnt l'analyse d'erreurs des coordonnées dérivées du lidar par le biais de l'équation de géoréférencement direct. Dans la littérature, une des composantes de l'équation, la déviation de la verticale (DV), a été largement ignorée. La composante rotationnelle sert à réconcilier les systèmes de référence ellipsoïdal et local et est souvent considérée comme négligeable. La sensibilité des coordonnées dérivées du lidar à la déviation de la verticale a été examinée par le biais d'une simulation. Ceci est réalisé en dérivant des coordonnées tridimensionnelles au moyen de l'équation de géoréférencement direct et en ignorant et en incluant à la fois la déviation de la verticale. Le fait de ne pas considérer cette composante a permis de compenser les précisions horizontales publiées commercialement à des magnitudes de 34″, 35″ et 37″ pour des hauteurs de vol de 1000 m, 2000 m et 3000 m respectivement et les précisions verticales à 53″, 40″ et 35″ pour les hauteurs de vol de 1000 m, 2000 m et 3000 m respectivement. Des valeurs de cette magnitude sont fréquentes dans les environnements montagneux et celles-ci ne devraient pas être ignorées. Enfin, l'erreur inévitable existant dans les déterminations de la déviation de la verticale a été rapportée et déterminée comme étant également significative dans le budget global d'erreurs lidar.[Traduit par la Rédaction]

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207