A COMPARISON OF SIMULATED ANNEALING, GENETIC ALGORITHM AND PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION IN OPTIMAL FIRST-ORDER DESIGN OF INDOOR TLS NETWORKS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The optimal network design problem has been well addressed in geodesy and photogrammetry but has not received the same attention for terrestrial laser scanner (TLS) networks. The goal of this research is to develop a complete design system that can automatically provide an optimal plan for high-accuracy, large-volume scanning networks. The aim in this paper is to use three heuristic optimization methods, simulated annealing (SA), genetic algorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO), to solve the first-order design (FOD) problem for a small-volume indoor network and make a comparison of their performances. The room is simplified as discretized wall segments and possible viewpoints. Each possible viewpoint is evaluated with a score table representing the wall segments visible from each viewpoint based on scanning geometry constraints. The goal is to find a minimum number of viewpoints that can obtain complete coverage of all wall segments with a minimal sum of incidence angles. The different methods have been implemented and compared in terms of the quality of the solutions, runtime and repeatability. The experiment environment was simulated from a room located on University of Calgary campus where multiple scans are required due to occlusions from interior walls. The results obtained in this research show that PSO and GA provide similar solutions while SA doesn’t guarantee an optimal solution within limited iterations. Overall, GA is considered as the best choice for this problem based on its capability of providing an optimal solution and fewer parameters to tune.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".