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 OpenAlexaff
Craig Glennie, Derek D. Lichti

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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

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

Citations44
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207