A Blind Comparison Between Results of Four Image Analysis Systems Using a Photo-Library of Piles of Sieved Fragments

By J. Latham, J. Kemeny, N. Maerz, Michael Noy, J. Schleifer, S. Tose. 2003

53 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Civil and Structural Engineering, Geology, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3d22b17cad3521aec5795339a05e43cfc2ac8a7a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. F. Ouchterlony
2. J. Sanchidrián
3. L. M. López
4. P. Segarra

Citations in the corpus

• On the accuracy of fragment size measurement by image analysis in combination with some distribution functions (2009, methodology): “For instance, the Klinthagen samples’ errors are generally negative in the coarse range, probably due to the fact that in this range the reference values (sieved) are a linear interpolation in log-log space between the value at 100 mm and the maximum size (see Fig. 6). Errors of the A2–A3 samples in”