MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7062424020

Urban Roadside Tree Inventory Using a Mobile Laser Scanning System

2016· dissertation· en· W7062424020 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Generation Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree (set theory)Cluster analysisSegmentationLaser scanningForest inventoryEuclidean distanceCrown (dentistry)Point (geometry)Change detection
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

the road environment. Thus, effective methods are needed for the MLS data processing.
\nThe main goal of this thesis is to establish a feasible workflow by testing a series of methods to extract geometrical information of roadside trees from the MLS-acquired point clouds. The workflow developed in this study consists of three parts. The first part deals with ground point removal. As such, only off-ground points are used to extract trees. The second part handles tree detection by comparing four segmentation and clustering methods: the Euclidian distance clustering algorithm, the region growing segmentation method, the normalized cut (Ncut) method, and the supervoxel-based tree detection method. The third part focuses on automated extraction of tree geometric parameters such as tree height, DBH, crown spread, and horizontal slices features. Finally, classification of tree species was conducted using the k-Nearest Neighbour (k-NN) and the random forests (RF) algorithm. A total of four MLS datasets (three in Xiamen, China and one in Kingston, Ontario) acquired in
\niv
\n2013 and 2015, respectively, were used to test the developed method. The ground truthing data of DBH estimation were obtained through manual measurement of selected roadside trees after the two MLS missions in Xiamen in the fall 2015. The field surveyed DBH values of the 163 roadside trees were used to estimate the accuracy of the proposed tree extraction method. The 200 manually labeled trees with 8 different species were selected to examine accuracy of the proposed classification method. The results show that over 90% of the roadside trees were correctly detected, with an average error of about 5% in DBH estimation when compared to the field survey, and an overall accuracy of 78% for the classification of tree species.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.183 · 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