MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR THE REPRESENTATION OF LANDFORMS USING ONTOLOGY DESIGN PATTERNS

2016· article· en· W2466584739 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Guilbert, Bernard Moulin, Andrés Cortés Murcia

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutions3v Geomatics (Canada)Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandformSalientRepresentation (politics)TerrainComputer scienceGeologyOntologyConnotationArtificial intelligenceGeographyCartographyGeomorphologyLinguisticsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. A landform is an area of a terrain with its own recognisable shape. Its definition is often qualitative and inherently vague. Hence landforms are difficult to formalise in view of their extraction from a DTM. This paper presents a two-level framework for the representation of landforms. The objective is to provide a structure where landforms can be conceptually designed according to a common model which can be implemented. It follows the principle that landforms are not defined by geometrical characteristics but by salient features perceived by people. Hence, these salient features define a skeleton around which the landform is built. The first level of our model defines general concepts forming a landform prototype while the second level provides a model for the translation of these concepts and landform extraction on a DTM. The model is still under construction and preliminary results together with current developments are also presented.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topic3D Modeling in Geospatial ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207