MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analytical Approach to Augmenting Site Photos with 3D Graphics of Underground Infrastructure in Construction Engineering Applications

2010· article· en· W2138544664 on OpenAlexaff
Fei Dai, Ming Lu, Vineet R. Kamat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing in Civil Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsCanadian Natural Resources
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosition (finance)Computer scienceOrientation (vector space)Process (computing)GraphicsObject (grammar)Focus (optics)Perspective (graphical)Computer graphics (images)Computer graphicsComputer visionVirtual imageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an analytical approach to incorporating computer-generated three-dimensional (3D) graphics of invisible underground infrastructure into site photos so as to present a richer and more integral view of the site situation in construction engineering applications. The proposed approach simulates the image-forming process of a camera and produces a virtual photo of the underground scene, whose virtual coordinate axes coincide with the real coordinate axes of the aboveground site scene. As a result, the virtual photo and the site photo can be seamlessly merged in terms of perspective, position, and scale. This research simplifies the calculation of the camera’s spatial orientation by use of only two reference points’ positions, i.e., the camera station position and the object focus position. The whole procedure of the proposed approach is analytical and can be automated into a computer program. In practice, nondestructive subsurface imaging technologies are generally used to obtain the spatial data of the underground infrastructure, which can be readily processed into a 3D as-built model as one component in composing the virtual underground scene. The proposed approach is demonstrated with a case study in which the underground as-built data are superimposed onto the aboveground site photo for the purpose of quality investigation of a bored pile construction.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.189
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computing in Civil EngineeringSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207