MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2903076887 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-13250

Sea-ice topographic surveying using Structure-from-Motion photogrammetry conducted from small UAVs

2018· dissertation· en· W2903076887 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin St-Amant

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersCanadian Armed Forces
KeywordsPhotogrammetryStructure from motionRemote sensingScale (ratio)Global Positioning SystemSea iceGeologyGeodesyGeographyComputer scienceMotion (physics)CartographyArtificial intelligenceOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The heterogenous topography of sea-ice is difficult to measure, monitor and predict.Recent technological improvements have enabled the development of structure from motion (SfM) surveying using small unmanned aerial vehicles (sUAVs).sUAV-SfM surveying was evaluated as a low-cost technique of obtaining sea-ice topography.Field data collection was conducted in Frobisher Bay and consisted of several sUAV-SfM surveys at the sub-kilometre-and kilometre-level spatial scale.RMSE values of 87 mm and 80 mm were obtained, respectively, for comparing the sUAV-SfM to a reference dataset and for comparing among individual sUAV-SfM surveys.The technique was successful at detecting, measuring and visualizing sea-ice features, such as pressure ridges.When compared to established techniques at similar spatial scales, sUAV-SfM was generally superior in terms of cost, simplicity, flexibility and ground resolution, but it suffered from low reliability due to accuracy issues with low-cost GPS receivers.I'll be forever grateful for all the support I've received from multiple people and organizations throughout this thesis.Thanks to my supervisors, Derek Mueller and Adrienne Tivy, who proposed the unexpectedly rich subject of sea-ice as a target to explore SfM, for your guidance during the preparation and post-processing, and for your invaluable support during the thesis writing.Thanks to Adam Garbo, since without your tremendous help, your UAV and fieldwork expertise and the hundreds of hours you've dedicated, both this thesis and the UAV would have had never taken-off.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage→French-language works237,207→