International Conference on Military Technologies (ICMT) 2015 2015
DOI: 10.1109/miltechs.2015.7153725
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accuracy of the new generation elevation models

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The multiple average error (± 2σ) was chosen because of the known fact that for onedimensional normal distribution the probability density of the observed phenomenon reaches for this value about 95% (Böhm 1990 The analysis of the accuracy of the models was focused primarily on assessing the accuracy in both the open and forested terrains. The results showed that despite a presence of systematic effects the models comply with the declared accuracy in both the open terrain and the areas covered by vegetation (Hubacek et al 2015).…”
Section: Verification Of Accuracymentioning
confidence: 71%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The multiple average error (± 2σ) was chosen because of the known fact that for onedimensional normal distribution the probability density of the observed phenomenon reaches for this value about 95% (Böhm 1990 The analysis of the accuracy of the models was focused primarily on assessing the accuracy in both the open and forested terrains. The results showed that despite a presence of systematic effects the models comply with the declared accuracy in both the open terrain and the areas covered by vegetation (Hubacek et al 2015).…”
Section: Verification Of Accuracymentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Verification is performed by the CUZK as a principle producer of these models and also by the independent organizations such as universities. Already obtained results of verification can be found for example in (Mikita et al 2013, Hubacek et al 2014, Silhavy and Cada 2015. The following verification methods are recommended: (Brazdil et al 2012a(Brazdil et al , 2012b: -special calibrating bases -known geodetic heights -terrain height measurement in selected areas.…”
Section: Verification Of Accuracymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The analysis of the accuracy of the models was focused primarily on assessing the accuracy in both the open and forested terrains. The results showed that despite a presence of systematic effects the models comply with the declared accuracy in both the open terrain and the areas covered by vegetation (Hubacek et al 2015).…”
Section: Verification Of Accuracymentioning
confidence: 71%
“…The key approach of the article, i.e., identifying the influence of slope accuracy on the results of CCM analyses, was based on both national and international studies. The basic methodology of analysis of elevation models was given in [4]. The study compared the accuracy of heights of terrain models with measured values in the field and assigned them specific output statistics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%