MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144651255 · doi:10.1109/m2rsm.2011.5697392

Mounting Parameters Calibration of GPS/INS-Assisted Photogrammetric Systems

2011· article· en· W2144651255 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Paula Kersting, Ayman Habib, Ki In Bang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotogrammetryInertial measurement unitGlobal Positioning SystemOffset (computer science)CalibrationOrientation (vector space)Camera resectioningComputer scienceComputer visionTriangulationInertial navigation systemArtificial intelligenceRemote sensingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been a significant advancement in the remote sensing and mapping technology in the last few decades. Due to its decreasing cost and increasing resolution, digital cameras are rapidly replacing the need for the conventional large format analogue cameras. Also, with the advent of GPS/INS, direct sensor orientation became possible, providing the means for an almost control-free mapping environment. Although several advantages are offered by the direct sensor orientation, precaution should be taken when dealing with multi-sensor systems. In GPS/INS-assisted photogrammetric systems, besides the camera calibration, the geometric relationship between the sensors (mounting parameters) must be known as well. More specifically, the lever-arm offset between the sensors, as well as the misalignment (boresight angles) between the IMU body frame and the photogrammetric camera should be determined. The offsets are usually measured using traditional surveying techniques, while approximate values for the boresight angles are known from the mechanical alignment. Since these initial mounting parameters might be biased, they should be refined through an in-flight calibration procedure. Also, some of the camera IOP, such as the principal point coordinates and the principal distance, might experience changes under operational conditions and need to be refined in the in-flight calibration as well. The objective of this paper is to introduce a methodology for the in-flight photogrammetric system calibration, as it relates to control and flight configuration requirements. The paper starts with a brief discussion of the concept of GPS/INS-assisted photogrammetric triangulation procedure. Then, the concept of the proposed rigorous analysis to devise the optimum flight and control configuration for reliable estimation of the system parameters is presented. The validity of the presented analysis is demonstrated through experimental results using simulated and real datasets.

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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryFrench-language works237,207