Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Although various rigorous lidar error models already exist and examples of a-posteriori studies of lidar data accuracies verified with field-work can be found in the literature, a simple measure to define a-priori error sizes is not available. In this paper, the lidar error contributions are described in detail: the basic systematic error sources, the flight-missionrelated error sources, and the target-characteristic-related error sources. A review of the different error-source sizes is drawn from the literature in order to define the boundary conditions for each error size. Schenk’s geolocation equation is used as a basis for deriving a simplified error model. This model enables a quick calculation and gives a-priori plausible values for the average and maximum error size, independent of the scan and heading angles as well as being independent of any specific lidar system’s characteristics. Additionally, some notes are provided for assistance when ordering lidar data, to enable easier a-posteriori quality control.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Čekada et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: