2012
DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/kem.500.696
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Classification of Airborne Lidar Data by Echo

Abstract: With the continuous development of Airborne Lidar hardware, the current data collection system will not only collect information on a single echo, multiple echo information also can be available. Through the analysis and discussion of echo principle, this paper compares and elaborates the characteristics of single-echo and multiple echo information, and introduces a filter classification method based on echo information, and illustrates that the method is simple and effective according to an example.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 2 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, most studies focus on LiDAR data analysis for topography, vegetation or built-up purposes, exclusively using the cloud points classified as "ground" and "above-ground" as well as intensity images. Yet, the characteristics of laser returns are not yet fully used, while intermediate returns contain useful information for vegetation structure characterization (Wang et al, 2012). In terms of articulation with ground based approaches (Raven et al, 1998;Munné et al, 2003;Debruxelles et al, 2009), very few authors compared field based and geomatic based methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, most studies focus on LiDAR data analysis for topography, vegetation or built-up purposes, exclusively using the cloud points classified as "ground" and "above-ground" as well as intensity images. Yet, the characteristics of laser returns are not yet fully used, while intermediate returns contain useful information for vegetation structure characterization (Wang et al, 2012). In terms of articulation with ground based approaches (Raven et al, 1998;Munné et al, 2003;Debruxelles et al, 2009), very few authors compared field based and geomatic based methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%