MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416812336 · doi:10.1016/j.ophoto.2025.100111

Circlegrammetry for drone imaging: Evaluating a novel technique for mission planning and 3D mapping

2025· article· en· W4416812336 on OpenAlexafffund
Mathieu F. Bilodeau, Travis J. Esau, Mason T. MacDonald, Aitazaz A. Farooque

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS Open Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDalhousie University
KeywordsOblique caseDronePhotogrammetryOrthophotoPoint (geometry)NadirSilhouette

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circlegrammetry is a new drone photogrammetry technique that utilizes circular flight paths. This approach promises higher efficiency for 3D modelling compared to traditional grid-based methods. This study evaluates its performance in a Christmas tree (Balsam fir) field, a complex agricultural environment characterized by intricate vegetation geometry. Experiments were conducted in a 2-ha orchard located in Truro, Nova Scotia, using a DJI Matrice 300 RTK equipped with a high-resolution optical camera. Three Circlegrammetry missions with varying overlaps (25 and 50 %) and flight heights (40 and 60 m) were compared against standard oblique and smart oblique drone missions flown at an flight heights of 60 m. Mission assessments focused on flight efficiency, processing performance and reconstruction accuracy. The point density of the tree canopy, generated from dense point clouds, was also evaluated against different survey methods. Results demonstrated that Circlegrammetry significantly reduced flight times and the number of images required, particularly at lower overlap configurations. For example, Circlegrammetry with a 25 % overlap achieved mission completion in about half the time required for smart oblique methods and in approximately one-third the duration of standard oblique missions. Processing efficiency was similarly favoured by Circlegrammetry (25 % overlap), with notable reductions in processing times. In terms of reconstruction quality, Circlegrammetry produced spatially accurate models with ground-control RMSE values ranging from 1.38 to 1.53 cm. These results were comparable to those of traditional oblique methods, despite not utilizing nadir imagery. However, Circlegrammetry showed limitations in capturing lower canopy details on the tree, with an average point density higher than that of other methods. For example, Circle 25 % performed the worst, with an average point spacing of 15.79 points per millimetre for the lower canopy. In contrast, the standard oblique approach performed the best, with an average point spacing of 11.89 points per millimetre. This suggested some constraints inherent to the inward-facing of the camera and higher oblique-angle flight paths on Cirlegrammetry missions. Overall, Circlegrammetry emerges as a promising method for precision agriculture applications by striking a balance between flight efficiency and reconstruction detail. Circlegrammetry with a 50 % overlap was demonstrated to be a comparable alternative to the smart oblique acquisition method. Future research should focus on optimizing overlap percentages and flight configurations to improve lower canopy coverage further and generalize these findings across diverse agricultural contexts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS Open Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote SensingSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207