MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361204252 · doi:10.5539/hes.v13n2p28

Assessing Drone Mapping Capabilities and Increased Cognitive Retention Using Interactive Hands-On Natural Resource Instruction

2023· article· en· W4361204252 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Victoria Williams, Daniel Unger, David Kulhavy, IKuai Hung, Yanli Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStephen F. Austin State University
KeywordsDroneGeospatial analysisOrthophotoNatural resourceResource (disambiguation)CurriculumComputer scienceNatural resource managementRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceGeographyEcologySociologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), also known as drones, is increasing in geospatial science curricula within the United States. Four geospatial science faculty members within the Arthur Temple College of Forestry and Agriculture at Stephen F. Austin State University (SFASU), Texas, focus on applying imagery obtained from drones to map, monitor, and quantify natural resources. To produce society-ready foresters, natural resource managers, and environmental scientists, the geospatial science faculty employ an intensive one-on-one hands-on interactive approach in training future resource management professionals in how to effectively apply drone technology within natural resource endeavors. In particular, recent instruction has focused on training students how to evaluate the amount of overlap and sidelap percentages required within a drone flight to create the optimum orthophoto mosaic. Results indicate that the one-on-one interactive methodology employed by faculty at SFASU produce highly qualified drone pilots capable of providing the drone community with new insights on how to produce accurate orthophoto mosaics in a timely and efficient manner.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207