Accuracy assessment using different UAV image overlaps
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unmanned aerial vehicle images are considered an important tool in close-range photogrammetry for topographic map production and 3D modelling using structure-from-motion approaches. The effect of overlap percentage in vertical and integrated vertical and oblique images on accuracy is evaluated. Analysis showed that the accuracy of the photogrammetric products (e.g., digital surface model and orthoimagery) is increased with the increased overlap percentage in vertical images. The accuracy is better when oblique images are integrated into vertical images than when only vertical images are used even with the same number of images. Furthermore, the building façade is constructed, but the building suffers from noise. Increasing the number of integrated vertical and oblique images improves the accuracy of the products and provides considerable precision to 3D modelling. This study showed that the improved result is due to the increased redundancy in image matching and optimised parameters of interior orientation through self-calibration. The images are processed using Pix4D software.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it