MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137151237 · doi:10.3390/rs71013029

A 4D Filtering and Calibration Technique for Small-Scale Point Cloud Change Detection with a Terrestrial Laser Scanner

2015· article· en· W2137151237 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan Kromer, Antonio Abellán, D. Jean Hutchinson, Matt Lato, Tom Edwards, Michel Jaboyedoff

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian Pacific Railway (Canada)BGC Engineering (Canada)Queen's University
FundersUniversité de LausanneNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's University
KeywordsPoint cloudSmoothingComputer scienceLaser scanningRemote sensingDeformation monitoringScale (ratio)CalibrationScale spaceChange detectionRedundancy (engineering)GeologyAlgorithmDeformation (meteorology)Computer visionLaserMathematicsImage processingGeographyOpticsPhysicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a point cloud de-noising and calibration approach that takes advantage of point redundancy in both space and time (4D). The purpose is to detect displacements using terrestrial laser scanner data at the sub-mm scale or smaller, similar to radar systems, for the study of very small natural changes, i.e., pre-failure deformation in rock slopes, small-scale failures or talus flux. The algorithm calculates distances using a multi-scale normal distance approach and uses a set of calibration point clouds to remove systematic errors. The median is used to filter distance values for a neighbourhood in space and time to reduce random type errors. The use of space and time neighbours does need to be optimized to the signal being studied, in order to avoid smoothing in either spatial or temporal domains. This is demonstrated in the application of the algorithm to synthetic and experimental case examples. Optimum combinations of space and time neighbours in practical applications can lead to an improvement of an order or two of magnitude in the level of detection for change, which will greatly improve our ability to detect small changes in many disciplines, such as rock slope pre-failure deformation, deformation in civil infrastructure and small-scale geomorphological change.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations94
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207