As-Built Inventory and Deformation Analysis of a High Rockfill Dam under Construction with Terrestrial Laser Scanning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The construction of large earth/rock fill dams, albeit its remarkable progress, still relies largely on past experiences. Therefore, a comprehensive yet dependable monitoring program is particularly beneficial for guiding the practice. However, conventional measurements can only produce limited discrete data. This paper exploits the potential of the terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) for an accurate inventory of as-built states of a concrete-faced rockfill dam under construction and for a full-field analysis of the 3D deformation pattern over its upstream face. For the former, a well-designed 3D geodetic system, with a particular consideration of the topography, promises a regulated acquisition of high-quality and blind-zone-free point cloud at field and also eases the cumbersome data registration process while maintaining its precision in house. For the latter, a problem-tailored processing pipeline is proposed for deformation extraction. Its core idea is to achieve a highly precise alignment of the point clouds with Iterative Closed Point algorithms from different epochs in datum areas that displays a featured, undeformed geometry at stable positions across epochs. Then, the alignment transformation matrix is applied to the point clouds of respective upstream face for each epoch, followed by pairwise comparisons of multiple adjusted point clouds for deformation evaluation. A processing pipeline is used to exploit the peal scene data redundancy of the GLQ dam acquired at six different epochs. Statistical analysis shows that satisfactory accuracy for deformation detection can be repeatably achieved, regardless of the scanner's positioning uncertainties. The obtained 3D deformation patterns are characterised by three different zones: practically undeformed, outward and inward deformed zones. Their evolutions comply well with real construction stages and unique 3D valley topography. Abundant deformation results highlight the potential of TLS combined with the proposed data processing pipeline for cost-efficient monitoring of huge infrastructures compared to conventional labor-intense measurements.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".