Direct Georeferencing UAV-SfM in High-Relief Topography: Accuracy Assessment and Alternative Ground Control Strategies along Steep Inaccessible Rock Slopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Steep rock slopes present key opportunities and challenges within Earth science applications. Due to partial or complete inaccessibility, high-precision surveys of these high-relief landscapes remain a challenge. Direct georeferencing (DG) of unoccupied aerial vehicles (UAVs) with advanced onboard GNSS receivers presents opportunities to generate high-resolution 3D datasets without ground-based access to the study area. However, recent research has revealed large vertical errors using DG that may prove problematic in near-vertical terrain. To address these concerns, we examined more than 75 photogrammetric UAV-datasets with various imaging angles (nadir, oblique, and combinations) and ground control scenarios, including DG, along a steep slope exposure. Results demonstrate that mean errors in DG scenarios are up to 0.12 m higher than datasets using integrated georeferencing with well-distributed GCPs. Inclusion of GCPs greatly reduced mean error values but had limited influence on precision (<0.01 m) for any given imaging strategy. Use of multiple image angles resulted in the highest precisions, regardless of georeferencing strategy. These findings have implications for applications requiring the highest precision and accuracy (e.g., geotechnical engineering, hazard mitigation and mapping, and geomorphic change detection), which should consider using ground control whenever possible. However, for applications less concerned with absolute accuracy, our results show that DG datasets provide strong internal consistency and relative accuracy that may be suitable for high precision measurements within a model, without use of ground control.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".