ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Quality Analysis of 3D Point Cloud Using Low-Cost Spherical Camera for Underpass Mapping.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correction: Rezaei et al. Quality Analysis of 3D Point Cloud Using Low-Cost Spherical Camera for Underpass Mapping.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Network Design and Solutions of Fisheye Camera Calibration for 3D Reconstruction.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional point cloud evaluation is used in photogrammetry to validate and assess the accuracy of data acquisition in order to generate various three-dimensional products. This paper determines the optimal accuracy and correctness of a 3D point cloud produced by a low-cost spherical camera in comparison to the 3D point cloud produced by laser scanner. The fisheye images were captured from a chessboard using a spherical camera, which was calibrated using the commercial Agisoft Metashape software (version 2.1). For this purpose, the results of different calibration methods are compared. In order to achieve data acquisition, multiple images were captured from the inside area of our case study structure (an underpass in Wiesbaden, Germany) in different configurations with the aim of optimal network design for camera location and orientation. The relative orientation was generated from multiple images obtained by removing the point cloud noise. For assessment purposes, the same scene was captured with a laser scanner to generate a metric comparison between the correspondence point cloud and the spherical one. The geometric features of both point clouds were analyzed for a complete geometric quality assessment. In conclusion, this study highlights the promising capabilities of low-cost spherical cameras for capturing and generating high-quality 3D point clouds by conducting a thorough analysis of the geometric features and accuracy assessments of the absolute and relative orientations of the generated clouds. This research demonstrated the applicability of spherical camera-based photogrammetry to challenging structures, such as underpasses with limited space for data acquisition, and achieved a 0.34 RMS re-projection error in the relative orientation step and a ground control point accuracy of nearly 1 mm. Compared to the laser scanner point cloud, the spherical point cloud reached an average distance of 0.05 m and acceptable geometric consistency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.