Quantifying spatial uncertainties in structure from motion snow depth mapping with drones in an alpine environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the heterogeneous nature of alpine snow distribution, advances in hydrological monitoring and forecasting for water resource management require an increase in the frequency, spatial resolution and coverage of field observations. Such detailed snow information is also needed to foster advances in our understanding of how snowpack affects local ecology and geomorphology. Although recent use of structure-from-motion multi-view stereo (SFM-MVS) 3D reconstruction techniques combined with aerial image collection using drones has shown promising potential to provide higher spatial and temporal resolution snow depth data for snowpack monitoring, there still remain challenges to produce high-quality data with this approach. These challenges, which include differentiating observations from noise and overcoming biases in the elevation data, are inherent in digital elevation model (DEM) differencing. A key issue to address these challenges is our ability to quantify measurement uncertainties in the SFM-MVS snow depths which can vary in space and time. The purpose of this thesis was to develop data-driven approaches for spatially quantifying, characterizing and reducing uncertainties in SFM-MVS snow depth mapping in alpine areas. Overall, this thesis provides a general framework for performing a detailed analysis of the spatial pattern of SFM-MVS snow depth uncertainties, as well as provides an approach for correction of snow depth errors due to changes in the sub-snow topography occurring between survey acquisition dates. It also contributes to the growing support of SFM-MVS combined with imagery acquired from drones as a suitable surveying technique for local scale snow distribution monitoring in alpine areas.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".