MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170364688 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2010.2043677

Automatic Extraction of Control Points for the Registration of Optical Satellite and LiDAR Images

2010· article· en· W2170364688 on OpenAlexaff
Roman M. Palenichka, Marek B. Zaremba

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceLidarComputer visionComputer scienceImage registrationFeature extractionRemote sensingSatelliteRangingSalientPattern recognition (psychology)GeographyImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel method for automatic extraction of control points for the registration of optical images with Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) data is proposed. It is based on transformation-invariant detection of salient image disks (SIDs), which determine the location of control points as the centers of the corresponding image fragments. The SID is described by a feature vector, which, in addition to the coordinates and diameter, includes intensity descriptors and region shape characteristics of the image fragment. SIDs are effectively extracted using multiscale isotropic matched filtering-a visual attention operator that indicates image locations with high-intensity contrast, homogeneity, and local shape saliency. This paper discusses the extraction of control points from both natural landscapes and structured scenes with man-made objects. Registration experiments conducted on QuickBird imagery with corresponding LiDAR data validated the proposed approach.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations60
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207