MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083736525 · doi:10.3390/s20185056

Direct Georeferencing for the Images in an Airborne LiDAR System by Automatic Boresight Misalignments Calibration

2020· article· en· W3083736525 on OpenAlexaff
Haichi Ma, Hongchao Ma, Ke Liu, Wenjun Luo, Liang Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLidarPoint cloudPhotogrammetryComputer visionIntersection (aeronautics)Computer scienceRemote sensingCalibrationTriangulationArtificial intelligenceRangingElevation (ballistics)Digital elevation modelPoint (geometry)GeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airborne Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) system and digital camera are usually integrated on a flight platform to obtain multi-source data. However, the photogrammetric system calibration is often independent of the LiDAR system and performed by the aerial triangulation method, which needs a test field with ground control points. In this paper, we present a method for the direct georeferencing of images collected by a digital camera integrated in an airborne LiDAR system by automatic boresight misalignments calibration with the auxiliary of point cloud. The method firstly uses an image matching to generate a tie point set. Space intersection is then performed to obtain the corresponding object coordinate values of the tie points, while the elevation calculated from the space intersection is replaced by the value from the LiDAR data, resulting in a new object point called Virtual Control Point (VCP). Because boresight misalignments exist, a distance between the tie point and the image point of VCP can be found by collinear equations in that image from which the tie point is selected. An iteration process is performed to minimize the distance with boresight corrections in each epoch, and it stops when the distance is smaller than a predefined threshold or the total number of epochs is reached. Two datasets from real projects were used to validate the proposed method and the experimental results show the effectiveness of the method by being evaluated both quantitatively and visually.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207