MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2176966408 · doi:10.3403/30421990

Unmanned aircraft systems

2022· standard· en· W2176966408 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typestandard
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCommand and General Staff CollegeU.S. ArmyUniversity of Kansas
KeywordsAeronauticsAerospace engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) or Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) has been attracting much attention among geomatics and geospatial professionals recently. The typical UAS consists of an autonomous aircraft with a highly advanced navigation system and a high quality digital camera. The systems are often used in situations where a more traditional form of data collection is either impractical or impossible due factors such as project size, high risk environments, accessibility issues etc. The system will rapidly capture digital images of an area of interest which are subsequently post processed along with flight log files to produce a surprisingly high quality orthomosaic and digital elevation model (DEM). Image resolution and model density are controlled by flight altitude and image overlap, however georeferencing of data can be greatly enhanced through the use of survey quality ground control targets placed pre-flight. These targets will be identified by the user in the image processing software post-flight and will serve to calibrate the orthomosaic and the resulting DEM. Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation (MIT) have acquired a UAS and intend to employ this exciting new technology for a number of data collection applications. The following paper represents some background on our investigation into this technology from product research to product acquisition in our ongoing efforts toward the development of a BETTER, FASTER, SAFER and more cost effective method of data collection. For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD record number 201310RT334E.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.039

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207