Elastic and inelastic LiDAR pulse return phenomenology in coastal underwater biological substrates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of current and future climate-related environmental changes, the development of innovative underwater substrate detection, classification and imaging methods at large spatial scales is key in monitoring and understanding changes from stresses occurring in coastal ocean areas. This development will help understand the spatial distribution and abundance patterns of marine primary producers and ecosystem service providers such as macroalgae, eelgrass and other important ecosystem components such as coral, and can provide insights into future ecosystem response and better management practices. The objective of the current work is to describe an analysis of data acquired by full waveform underwater fluorescence LiDAR, designed for detecting, imaging, and generating 3D point clouds of inert and biological substrates capable of fluorescence. Since the instrument is designed as a small form-factor AUV payload operating at standoff distances of 5–10 m, we chose to implement full-waveform (2.5 Gs/s), pulsed 532 nm laser, capable of generating 1 ns pulses of up to 2.5 uJ at a 200 kHz repetition rate to generate elastic (532 nm) and inelastic (685 nm) 3D point clouds for underwater benthic mapping. Analysis of these acquired waveforms has shown opportunities for improving the point cloud density, by identifying multiple returns within the same waveform, when present. Pulse return processing methods such as Gaussian decomposition and Richardson-Lucy deconvolution are evaluated on data acquired during LiDAR sea-trials over various bottom substrates. As the present LiDAR beam footprint is relatively small to maximize energy density for longer range detection and potential fluorescence response, the number of detected returns per pulse ranges from one in the case of a bare benthic substrate and up to 2 or 3, in areas where for example, macroalgae, kelp, corals and/or other substrates characterized by a vertical structure are present.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it