|
⇤ ← Revision 1 as of 2015-10-13 16:43:25
Size: 164
Comment:
|
Size: 1005
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 2: | Line 2: |
Image suite: Same as OptimalF2. Results: The solution diverged away from truth when performing the basic "FindHeights" (i.e. options 8 and 2) whether or not we aligned (101n0y) after each calculation or updated the maplet height (v1). Using stereo (options 8,2,6) drifted away a bit but then oscillated. The neighboring maps were never altered, and including them (options 8,2,1) really nailed down the solution. Including neighboring maps as well as stereo (options 8,2,6,1) created a bit more drift and oscillation than just with neighboring maps, but the solution was still pretty good. Including extended shadow masking (options 8,2,6,1,7) gave a better solution than when it wasn't included. No limbs were found (option 4), so it was not tested. See Keynote presentation in SPC-ORex/Test_Info_documents/Test08/ for more details. |
Purpose of Test: Take a single maplet in center of a tiled area and perform many calculations of "FindHeights" on that maplet using various options within LITHOS.
Image suite: Same as OptimalF2.
Results: The solution diverged away from truth when performing the basic "FindHeights" (i.e. options 8 and 2) whether or not we aligned (101n0y) after each calculation or updated the maplet height (v1). Using stereo (options 8,2,6) drifted away a bit but then oscillated. The neighboring maps were never altered, and including them (options 8,2,1) really nailed down the solution. Including neighboring maps as well as stereo (options 8,2,6,1) created a bit more drift and oscillation than just with neighboring maps, but the solution was still pretty good. Including extended shadow masking (options 8,2,6,1,7) gave a better solution than when it wasn't included. No limbs were found (option 4), so it was not tested. See Keynote presentation in SPC-ORex/Test_Info_documents/Test08/ for more details.