MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046814709

A DISTANCE PROTOCOL FOR MID-RANGE TLS IN SUPPORT OF ASTM-E57 STANDARDS ACTIVITIES

2012· article· en· W7046814709 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)SoftwareObject (grammar)Measurement uncertaintyRange (aeronautics)System of measurementDistance measurementPlane (geometry)Virtual instrumentation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present experimental results with uncertainty analysis method for a proposed distance measurement protocol for mid-range terrestrial laser scanners (TLS). Three-dimensional (3D) imaging systems evaluation is performed in the environmentally controlled laboratory at NRC-IIT with the use of specially designed reference test object (RTO), test procedures and mathematical methods. The procedure is based on the evaluation of point-to-point distance measurements. The distance measurements characterizing a system under test (SUT) are taken between comparative points of reference (CPOR) located on the RTO plane surfaces. Selected CPORs are the intersections of particular lines of measurements with estimated RTO plane surfaces. The virtual lines of measurement are determined by using a spherical RTO. Uncertainty analysis for fitted planes, virtual lines of measurements and CPORs is performed with our software utilities especially created for this purpose. Data on commercial products are provided for the sake of illustrating the proposed protocol.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207