MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116321408 · doi:10.3390/rs3030539

Temporal Stability of the Velodyne HDL-64E S2 Scanner for High Accuracy Scanning Applications

2011· article· en· W2116321408 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScannerOffset (computer science)CalibrationRemote sensingLaser scanningResidualLidarGeodesyOpticsComputer sciencePhysicsGeologyMathematicsLaserAlgorithmStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The temporal stability and static calibration and analysis of the Velodyne HDL‑64E S2 scanning LiDAR system is discussed and analyzed. The mathematical model for measurements for the HDL-64E S2 scanner is updated to include misalignments between the angular encoder and scanner axis of rotation, which are found to be a marginally significant source of error. It is reported that the horizontal and vertical laser offsets cannot reliably be obtained with the current calibration model due to their high correlation with the horizontal and vertical offsets. By analyzing observations from two separate HDL-64E S2 scanners it was found that the temporal stability of the horizontal angle offset is near the quantization level of the encoder, but the vertical angular offset, distance offset and distance scale are slightly larger than expected. This is felt to be due to long term variations in the scanner range, whose root cause is as of yet unidentified. Nevertheless, a temporally averaged calibration dataset for each of the scanners resulted in a 25% improvement in the 3D planar misclosure residual RMSE over the standard factory calibration model.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.197 · 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