A New Method for Positional Accuracy Control for Non-Normal Errors Applied to Airborne Laser Scanner Data
Source abstract
Abstract
A new statistical method for the quality control of the positional accuracy, useful in a wide range of data sets, is proposed and its use is illustrated through its application to airborne laser scanner (ALS) data. The quality control method is based on the use of a multinomial distribution that categorizes cases of errors according to metric tolerances. The use of the multinomial distribution is a very novel and powerful approach to the problem of evaluating positional accuracy, since it allows for eliminating the need for a parametric model for positional errors. Three different study cases based on ALS data (infrastructure, urban, and natural cases) that contain non-normal errors were used. Three positional accuracy controls with different tolerances were developed. In two of the control cases, the tolerances were defined by a Gaussian model, and in the third control case, the tolerances were defined from the quantiles of the observed error distribution. The analysis of the test results based on the type I and type II errors show that the method is able to control the positional accuracy of freely distributed data.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Remote Sensing and LiDAR Applications · 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage · Remote Sensing in Agriculture
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Departamento de Ingeniería Cartográfica, Geodésica y Fotogrametría, Universidad de Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain
Departamento de Estadística e I. O. University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain
Department of Cartographic and Land Engineering. University of Salamanca, 05003 Ávila, Spain
Department of Mining Technology, Topography, and Structures, Universidad de León, 24401 Ponferrada (León), Spain
Funding
Spanish Ministry on Science and Innovation (Spain) and European Regional Development Funds
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Chen, Z., Gao, B., and Devereux, B. (2017). State-of-the-art: DTM generation using airborne LIDAR data. Sensors, 17.10.3390/s17010150 ↗
2. Salach, A., Bakuła, K., Pilarska, M., Ostrowski, W., Górski, K., and Kurczyński, Z. (2018). Accuracy assessment of point clouds from LidaR and dense image matching acquired using the UAV platform for DTM creation. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 7.10.3390/ijgi7090342 ↗
3. Uncertainty in Landslides Volume Estimation Using DEMs Generated by Airborne Laser Scanner and Photogrammetry Data10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-3-W4-397-2018 ↗
4. Simpson, J., Smith, T., and Wooster, M. (2017). Assessment of errors caused by forest vegetation structure in airborne LiDAR-derived DTMs. Remote Sens., 9.10.3390/rs9111101 ↗
5. Comparison of various algorithms for DTM interpolation from LIDAR data in dense mountain forests10.5721/EuJRS20164932 ↗
6. Multi-temporal 3D point cloud-based quantification and analysis of geomorphological activity at an alpine rock glacier using airborne and terrestrial LiDAR10.1002/ppp.2004 ↗
7. Resop, J.P., Lehmann, L., and Hession, W.C. (2019). Drone Laser Scanning for Modeling Riverscape Topography and Vegetation: Comparison with Traditional Aerial Lidar. Drones, 3.10.3390/drones3020035 ↗
8. Federal Geographic Data Committee (1998). FGDC-STD-007: Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Part 3. National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy.
9. American Society of Civil Engineers (1983). Map Uses, Scales and Accuracies for Engineering and Associated Purposes, American Society of Civil Engineers; Committee on Cartographic Surveying, Surveying and Mapping Division.
10. STANAG (2002). Standardization Agreement 2215: Evaluation of Land Maps, Aeronautical Charts and Digital Topographic Data, North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
11. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (2015). ASPRS Positional Accuracy standards for digital Geospatial Data. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens., 81, 53–63.10.14358/PERS.81.3.A1-A26 ↗
12. Höhle, J., and Potuckova, M. (2011). Assessment of the Quality of Digital Terrain Models, European Spatial Data Research. Report No. 60.
13. Analysis of some Positional Accuracy Assessment Methodologies10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2008)134:2(45) ↗
14. Maune, D.F. (2007). Digital Elevation Model Technologies and Applications: The Dem User’s Manual, American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.
15. Positional Accuracy of Spatial Data: Non-Normal Distributions and a Critique of the National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy10.1111/j.1467-9671.2008.01088.x ↗
16. Characterizing the error distribution of Lidar elevation data for North Carolina10.1080/01431160903474939 ↗
17. Approximation Theory Applied to DEM Vertical Accuracy Assessment10.1111/j.1467-9671.2012.01343.x ↗
18. Confronting passive and active sensors with non-gaussian statistics10.3390/s140813759 ↗
19. Accuracy assessment of airborne laser scanner dataset by means of parametric and non-parametric statistical methods10.1049/iet-smt.2014.0053 ↗
20. Consequences of failure to meet assumptions underlying the fixed effects analyses of variance and covariance10.3102/00346543042003237 ↗
21. Berman, J. (2013). Principles of Big Data. Preparing, Sharing, and Analyzing Complex Information, Morgan Kaufmann.
22. A Statistical Model Inspired by the National Map Accuracy Standard10.14358/PERS.80.3.271 ↗
23. United States Bureau of the Budget (1947). United States National Map Accuracy Standards.
24. Cheok, G., Filliben, J., and Lytle, A.M. (2008). NISTIR 7638. Guidelines for Accepting 2D Building Plans.10.6028/NIST.IR.7638 ↗
25. A method of positional quality control testing for 2D and 3D line strings10.1111/tgis.12117 ↗
26. Asociación Española de Normalización (2016). UNE 148002: 2016 Metodología de Evaluación de la Exactitud Posicional de la Información Geográfica, Asociación Española de Normalización.
27. International Organization for Standardization (1985). ISO 2859-2:1985. Sampling Procedures for Inspection by Attributes—Part 2: Sampling Plans Indexed by Limiting Quality (LQ) for Isolated Lot Inspection, ISO.
28. Review of mobile mapping and surveying systems10.1016/j.measurement.2013.03.006 ↗
29. CloudCompare (2018, February 28). CloudCompare Version 2.9.1. Available online: http://www.cloudcompare.org.
30. A robust modification of the Jarque–Bera test of normality10.1016/j.econlet.2007.05.022 ↗
31. Lawstat: An R package for law, public policy and biostatistics10.18637/jss.v028.i03 ↗
32. Investigation of indoor and outdoor performance of two portable mobile mapping systems10.1117/12.2270761 ↗
33. Accuracy assessment of digital elevation models by means of robust statistical methods10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2009.02.003 ↗
34. International Organization for Standardization (2013). ISO 19157: 2013. Geographic Information. Data Quality, ISO.
35. A Network Algorithm for Performing Fisher’s Exact Test in r×c Contingency Tables
36. Exact properties of some exact test statistics for comparing two binomial proportions10.1080/01621459.1990.10475318 ↗
37. Fisher, R.A. (1935). The Design of Experiments, Oliver Boyd.
38. Rohatgi, V.K. (2003). Statistical Inference, Dover Publications.
39. Variability of NSSDA estimations
40. Acceptance curves for the positional control of geographic data bases10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2008)134:1(26) ↗
41. Number of Replications Required in Monte Carlo Simulation Studies: A Synthesis of Four Studies10.22237/jmasm/1304222580 ↗
42. R Core Team (2018). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing.