MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180136417 · doi:10.3390/rs71115605

Automatic Object Extraction from Electrical Substation Point Clouds

2015· article· en· W2180136417 on OpenAlexafffund
Mostafa Arastounia, Derek D. Lichti

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsPoint cloudComputer scienceLaser scanningKey (lock)LidarCircuit breakerReliability (semiconductor)ScannerReal-time computingRemote sensingPower (physics)LaserElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reliability of power delivery can be profoundly improved by preventing wildlife-related power outages. This can be achieved by insulating electrical substation components with non-conductive covers. The manufacture of custom-built covers requires as-built models of the salient components. This study presents new, automated methodology to recognize key components of electrical substations from 3D LiDAR data acquired using terrestrial laser scanning. The proposed methodology includes six novel algorithms to recognize key components (fence, cables, circuit breakers, bushings and bus pipes) of electrical substations. Three datasets with different resolutions and configurations are used in this study. A Leica HDS 6100 laser scanner was used to acquire the first dataset and a Faro Focus3D laser scanner was employed to collect the second and third datasets. The obtained results indicate that 178 and 171 out of 181 electrical substation elements were successfully recognized in the first and second dataset, respectively, and 183 out of 191 components were identified in the third dataset. The results also demonstrate that an average 97.8% accuracy and average 98.8% precision at the point cloud level can be achieved.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations30
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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