2019
DOI: 10.1109/lgrs.2019.2899681
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensor-Based Optimization of Terrestrial Laser Scanning Measurement Setup on GPU

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[27,48,49] and [51] all discarded the LOA criterion in their framework. A number of other scan planning approaches [18,23,33,50,52,53,87], and [89] took the LOA criterion into account indirectly using a simple model based on incidence angle α and/or range thresholding (e.g. discard any portion of a line segment for which α ą 70 0 ).…”
Section: P4s In Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…[27,48,49] and [51] all discarded the LOA criterion in their framework. A number of other scan planning approaches [18,23,33,50,52,53,87], and [89] took the LOA criterion into account indirectly using a simple model based on incidence angle α and/or range thresholding (e.g. discard any portion of a line segment for which α ą 70 0 ).…”
Section: P4s In Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chen et al [88] utilised sweepray algorithm to satisfy LOD along with LOA as part of the visibility check on line targets. Notably, while [27,48,87] and [88] considered both range and incidence angle to indirectly assess LOD (which is shown by a Ś (big) in LOD column in Table 2), the other studies follow a less robust approach by not explicitly considering LOD but by only considering either one [49,51,18,50] or both of the range and the incidence angle [23,88,89,52,33,53] as part of their visibility check. [49,51] only considered range, while [18,50] considered incident angle only.…”
Section: P4s In Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations