MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234839522 · doi:10.5194/nhess-2018-366

3-Dimensional Rockfall Shape Back-Analysis: Methodsand Implications

2018· preprint· en· W4234839522 on OpenAlexafffundabout
David Bonneau, D. Jean Hutchinson, Paul-Mark DiFrancesco, Melanie Coombs, Zac Sala

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsBGC Engineering (Canada)Queen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTransport Canada
KeywordsRockfallCanyonTerrainGeologyProcess (computing)Remote sensingComputer scienceLandslideGeomorphologyCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Rockfall is a complex natural process that can present risks to the effective operation of infrastructure in mountainous terrain. Remote sensing tool and techniques are rapidly becoming the state of practice in the characterization, monitoring and management of these geohazards. The aim of this study is to address the methods and implications of how the dimensions of 3-dimensional rockfall objects, derived from sequential terrestrial laser scans (TLS), are measured. Previous approaches are reviewed, and two novel algorithms are introduced in an attempt to standardize the process. The approaches are applied to a set of synthetic rockfall objects generated in the open-source software package Blender. In addition, a database of close to 5000 rockfalls is presented derived from sequential TLS monitoring in the White Canyon, British Columbia, Canada. This study illustrates that the method in which the rockfall's dimensions are calculated has a significant impact on how the shape of a rockfall object is classified. This has implications for rockfall modelling as the block shape is known to influence rockfall runout.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207