Assessment of UAS Photogrammetry and Planet Imagery for Monitoring Water Levels around Railway Tracks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High water levels near railway tracks can be a major factor affecting the safety of train passage. Water conditions near the tracks are normally monitored through visual inspections. However, this method is limited in spatial coverage and may not provide comparable information over time. We evaluated the utility of satellite imagery (Planet Dove constellation at 3 m pixel size) at the landscape level to assess overall water surface area along railway tracks. Comparatively, we evaluated the use of Structure- from-Motion 3D point clouds and high spatial detail orthomosaics (3 cm) generated from a commercial off-the-shelf Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) (DJI M300 RTK) for measuring vertical water level changes and extent of surface water, respectively, within the right-of-way of a railway line in Ontario, Canada, in areas prone to high water level and flooding. Test sites of varied lengths (~180 m to 500 m), were assessed four times between June and October 2021. Our results indicate that the satellite imagery provides a large-scale overview regarding the extent of open water in wetlands at long distances from the railway tracks. Analysis of the UAS derived 3D point cloud indicates that changes in water level can be determined at the centimeter scale. Furthermore, the spatial error (horizontal and vertical alignments) between the multi-temporal UAS data collections between sites was less than 3 cm. Our research highlights the importance of using consistent UAS data collection protocols, and the significant potential of commercial off-the-shelf UAS systems for water level monitoring along railway tracks.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".