MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969884576 · doi:10.21608/iccae.2010.45110

A Framework for the Integration of Remote Sensing Systems for 3D Urban Mapping

2010· article· en· W2969884576 on OpenAlexafffund
Ayman Habib, Changjae Kim, Eunju Kwak

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Conference on Civil and Architecture Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaElectronics and Telecommunications Research Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceRemote sensingMobile mappingGeographyData scienceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As one of the fields of civil and architecture engineering, 3D urban mapping plays avital role in various applications such as urban planning, surveillance, virtual reality,virtual tourism, and military training. In this regard, the interest in 3D urban mappingtechnologies is rapidly increasing within the surveying and photogrammetriccommunity. Such an interest is also motivated by the advent of new technologies, whichenable accurate and practical 3D urban mapping. In other words, the proliferation ofdirect geo-referencing, digital imaging system (including medium-format digitalcamera) and LiDAR (Light Detection And Ranging) provide the respective researchbody with the potential to satisfy the detail level and complexity needed by the aboveapplications. Hence, there must be a framework for integrating these different kinds ofsensors. The proposed framework in this paper consists of three main components: 1)Quality Assurance/Quality Control; 2) Co-registration; and 3) Element Matching. Morespecifically, quality assurance of the mapping process and quality control of delivereddata/products are the first components of the proposed framework. Quality assuranceencompasses management activities to ensure that a process, item, or service is of thequality needed by the user. The key activity in the quality assurance is the systemcalibration procedure. After the calibration of the involved systems, quality controlprocedures determine whether the desired quality has been achieved through internaland external evaluation. As the second component of the framework, a registrationprocedure is conducted to ensure that the datasets from different systems are georeferencedwith respect to a common reference frame. After the registration procedure is completed, matching between different information from different systems is carried outto derive realistic 3D urban mapping that takes advantage of the synergisticcharacteristics of the available datasets. For example, the spectral information from adigital imaging system can be related to the positional information from LiDAR. Thepaper will illustrate the main components and the necessary activities of the proposedframework with the help of a real dataset.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Conference on Civil and Architecture EngineeringSame topic3D Modeling in Geospatial ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207