MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159377854 · doi:10.3390/geosciences11050188

Impact-Detection Algorithm That Uses Point Clouds as Topographic Inputs for 3D Rockfall Simulations

2021· article· en· W3159377854 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainRockfallPoint cloudSurface finishSurface roughnessAlgorithmDigital elevation modelComputer scienceRaster graphicsGeologyRemote sensingComputer visionLandslideGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous 3D rockfall simulation models use coarse gridded digital terrain model (DTM raster) as their topography input. Artificial surface roughness is often added to overcome the loss of details that occurs during the gridding process. Together with the use of sensitive energy damping parameters, they provide great freedom to the user at the expense of the objectivity of the method. To quantify and limit the range of such artificial values, we developed an impact-detection algorithm that can be used to extract the perceived surface roughness from detailed terrain samples in relation to the size of the impacting rocks. The algorithm can also be combined with a rebound model to perform rockfall simulations directly on detailed 3D point clouds. The abilities of the algorithm are demonstrated by objectively extracting different perceived surface roughnesses from detailed terrain samples and by simulating rockfalls on detailed terrain models as proof of concept. The results produced are also compared to that of rockfall simulation software CRSP 4, RocFall 8 and Rockyfor3D 5.2.15 as validation. Although differences were observed, the validation shows that the algorithm can produce similar results. With the presented approach not being limited to coarse terrain models, the need for adding artificial terrain roughness or for adjusting sensitive damping parameters on a per-site basis is reduced, thereby limiting the related biases and subjectivity.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.249 · 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