MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing a Semi-Autonomous Drone-in-a-Box System for Landslide Monitoring

2025· preprint· W4416971646 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Margaret Kalácska, Oliver Lucanus, J. Pablo Arroyo‐Mora, John Stix, Panya Lipovsky, J. Alberto San Román

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTransport Canada
KeywordsLandslideSoftwareSoftware systemGlobal Positioning SystemGeographic information system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commercial remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) are advancing rapidly, offering improved endurance, expanded sensor payloads, and increasingly sophisticated software capabilities. However, their operational efficiency remains limited by the need for on-site skilled human operators. Semi-autonomous drone-in-a-box (DIAB) systems are emerging as a practical solution, enabling automated, repeatable missions for applications such as construction monitoring, security, and critical infrastructure inspection. Beyond industry, these systems hold significant promise for scientific research, particularly in long-term environmental monitoring where cost, accessibility, and safety are critical factors. In this technology demonstration, we detail the system implementation, discuss flight-planning challenges, and assess the overall feasibility of deploying a DJI Dock 2 DIAB system for remote monitoring of an unstable mountain slope in northwestern Canada (Yukon Territory). The system was deployed approximately 2.5 km from the landslide and operated remotely from across the country in Montreal about 4,000 km away. This study highlights the potential of DIAB systems to support reliable, low-maintenance monitoring of remote natural hazards.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207