MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254459048 · doi:10.4095/219801

Error Tracking in IKONOS Geometric Processing Using a 3D Parametric Modelling

2003· report· en· W4254459048 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Th Toutin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTracking (education)Computer visionParametric statisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceParametric modelMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirteen panchromatic (Pan) and multiband (XS) IKONOS Geo-product images over seven study sites with various environments and terrain were tested using different cartographic data and accuracies with a 3D parametric model developed at the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, Natural Resources Canada. The objectives of this study were to define the relationship between the final accuracy and the number and accuracy of input data, to track error propagation during the full geometric correction process (bundle adjustment and ortho-rectification), and to advise on the applicability of the model in operational environments. <p> When ground control points (GCPs) have an accuracy poorer than 3 m, 20 GCPs over the entire image is a good compromise to obtain a 3- to 4-m accuracy in the bundle adjustment. When GCP accuracy is better than 1 m, 10 GCPs are enough to decrease the bundle adjustment error of either panchromatic or multiband images to 2-3 m. Because GCP residuals reflect the input data errors (map and/or plotting) these errors did not propagate through the 3D parametric model, and the internal accuracy of the geometric model is thus better (around a pixel or less). Quantitative and qualitative evaluations of ortho images were thus performed with either independent check points or overlaid digital vector files. Generally, the measured errors confirmed the predicted errors or even were slightly better, and 2-4 m positioning accuracy was achieved for the ortho images depending upon the elevation accuracy (DEM and grid spacing). To achieve a better final positioning accuracy, such as 1 m, a 1-2 m accurate DEM with fine grid spacing is required in addition to well-defined GCPs with an accuracy of 1 m.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.342
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.

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207