MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945760652 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2019.2915267

A Simplified End-User Approach to Lidar Very Shallow Water Bathymetric Correction

2019· article· en· W2945760652 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maxim Okhrimenko, Chris Hopkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsBathymetryLidarPoint cloudRiparian zoneRemote sensingWaves and shallow waterGeologyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airborne lidar bathymetry has been evolving in recent years, and the introduction of multispectral (MS) lidar, such as the Titan sensor from Teledyne Optech, Toronto, ON, Canada, allows for comprehensive mapping of aquatic and riparian areas. However, to derive useful riverbed geomorphology data, bathymetric correction should be applied to raw data based on the proximity of individual points within the laser point cloud to the overlying water surface. Current algorithms within off-the-shelf (OTS) software were developed for flat coastal waters and lakes and, therefore, may have difficulty with shallow river channels possessing discernible surface water gradients and/or complex riparian environments. A proposed simplified correction algorithm is based on a shift (scaling with k = 0.76) in depth values. Riverbed returns are normalized toward the overlying water surface, disregarding laser beam angle of incidence for each point. The resultant simplified bathymetric correction is, therefore, available to most end users and does not rely on black box OTS solutions. Validation of the method with an MS lidar data set is presented, and the expected neglectable introduced bias (sd = 1.4 cm) for very shallow (<; 2 m) water is confirmed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207