## 6 Discussion  
For the case study, initially, a three-dimensional, full-scale sculpture with no straight lines was considered as the validation example. This choice posed challenges in measuring reference distances and underscored the importance of using volume as a reference. However, the sculpture was ultimately not selected, and a brick wall was chosen instead as the case study to more effectively demonstrate the connection between the proposed methodology and architectural applications. In this scenario, estimating the volume was not practical since the bricks were partially embedded within the wall, making reference distances a more suitable approach. For this reason, distances were ultimately selected over volume for the analysis.  
This study addresses the limitations of iPad LiDAR for small, intricate cultural heritage artifacts, consistent with findings by [PERSON] et al. [10], who highlighted its strength in capturing larger, simpler architectural features. The challenges stem from the sensor's resolution and the difficulty of maintaining optimal positioning during scans, as also noted by [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2023) [41], who recommend maintaining a consistent scanning distance and angle for improved accuracy. While initial tests used everyday objects for accessibility, future research will focus on cultural heritage specific artifacts, such as columns and facades, to refine the methodology. These adjustments aim to enhance the reliability and applicability of LiDAR-based documentation for heritage structures conservation.  
The analysis of the models was intentionally kept as simple as possible to highlight the method's applicability and to encourage its use. As a result, the effects of converting the scan to a mesh, noise reduction algorithms, and potential data loss during the export/import process were not explored in this study. However, in future work, the proposed methodology will be extended to examine the potential effects of these parameters to enhance the robustness of the methodology and further explore its potential.  
It is important to emphasize that the primary objective of this work is not to identify the software but rather to propose a methodology for analyzing the effects of scanning parameters across any given tools. Future research could build on this approach by incorporating the influence of software. This would involve introducing new parameters, such as LiDAR application and mesh generation software, with various levels (e.g., Agisoft Photoscan or Reality Capture) for each, within the Taguchi analysis framework. Such an analysis would extend the proposed methodology, not only to identify the optimal scanning parameters but also to determine the best combination of LiDAR and mesh generation software for each specific case study. Moreover, the proposed methodology is not limited to the iPad Pro LiDAR and can also be applied to other LiDAR devices and to alternative scanning technologies, such as photogrammetry or terrestrial laser scanners. The application of this methodology to these other techniques will be explored in future research.  
Finally, the choice of measurement parameter does not affect the primary objective of the paper, which is to identify the optimal scanning parameters for a given tool and a specific parameter. In fact, the proposed methodology is highly versatile and can be directly applied to other scanning parameters, such as volumes and areas, allowing for broader applications across different measurement types. The analysis of other measurement types will be studied in future works.