MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161383968 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2021.1922879

Integration of Multi-Source Geospatial Data from GNSS Receivers, Terrestrial Laser Scanners, and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

2021· article· en· W3161383968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paweł Dąbrowski, Cezary Specht, Mariusz Specht, Paweł Burdziakowski, A. Makar, Oktawia Lewicka

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeospatial analysisGNSS applicationsBathymetryGeodetic datumHydrographic surveyRemote sensingPhotogrammetryComputer scienceGeographyGlobal Positioning SystemData integrationSystems engineeringData miningCartographyEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis based on geospatial data from different measurement systems now constitutes a complex numerical and practical enterprise. The dynamic development of modern technologies enables rapid and precise acquisition of such data. Nonetheless, the diversity of reference systems is today one of the main challenges for their correct interpretation. The combined use of the processed measurement results and archival data in paper form constitutes an important direction for the development of this discipline. This issue is visible during the implementation of complex hydrographic and geodetic surveys requiring geospatial integration of results. The publication presents both the theoretical basis and the practical verification of the adopted methodology. The research material comes from the measurement campaign conducted to determine geospatial parameters for the tombolo phenomenon in Sopot. The results of differential GNSS RTK measurements, terrestrial laser scanning, bathymetric survey, photogrammetry, and analog archival bathymetric map were subjected to the integration process. The effectiveness of the presented procedure was confirmed by the obtained error estimators of values not exceeding three centimeters.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207