UAV-LiCAM SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT: CALIBRATION AND GEO-REFERENCING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. In the last decade, applications of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), as remote-sensing platforms, have extensively been investigated for fine-scale mapping, modeling and monitoring of the environment. In few recent years, integration of 3D laser scanners and cameras onboard UAVs has also received considerable attention as these two sensors provide complementary spatial/spectral information of the environment. Since lidar performs range and bearing measurements in its body-frame, precise GNSS/INS data are required to directly geo-reference the lidar measurements in an object-fixed coordinate system. However, such data comes at the price of tactical-grade inertial navigation sensors enabled with dual-frequency RTK-GNSS receivers, which also necessitates having access to a base station and proper post-processing software. Therefore, such UAV systems equipped with lidar and camera (UAV-LiCam Systems) are too expensive to be accessible to a wide range of users. Hence, new solutions must be developed to eliminate the need for costly navigation sensors. In this paper, a two-fold solution is proposed based on an in-house developed, low-cost system: 1) a multi-sensor self-calibration approach for calibrating the Li-Cam system based on planar and cylindrical multi-directional features; 2) an integrated sensor orientation method for georeferencing based on unscented particle filtering which compensates for time-variant IMU errors and eliminates the need for GNSS measurements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".