## 3 Results and Discussion
### Variation in Overlap and Height
At 25 m, the error variation for the different overlaps decreases more compared to a height of 20 m. On the other hand, the least error (39.0%) was achieved with an overlap of 75%, which has 1.1% less error compared to an overlap of 80% and 4.4% less than the 90% overlap. Moreover, the error is reduced by 8.9% compared to an overlap of 85%. At 30 m, the least error was obtained (52.3%) with an overlap of 75%, for other overlaps (80, 85 and 90%) 100% errors were obtained, because the model did not rebuild potholes. At 40 m, all overlaps got 100% errors, which as mentioned earlier, is due to problems of modeling small bump sizes. Figure 9: Average relative error severity behavior for different severity levels when varying overlap and height for vertical image acquisition (90\({}^{\circ}\)). (**a**) Low severity; (**b**) mean severity; (**c**) high severity. From Figure 9b, it is observed that the measurement of widths has less error than the measurement of bump depth. In addition, the error obtained is reduced compared to the analysis for low severity potholes. It is observed that up to a 30-m measuring height, the error does not exceed 20% for the different overlaps and at 40 m, error values greater than 45% are reached. At 2 m, the least error was obtained (1%) with an overlap of 80%, which has 0.6% less error compared to the overlap of 85%, while for an overlap of 75 and 90% the error is reduced by 1.4 to 1.1%. At 5 m, the minimum error value (0.5%) was obtained with an overlap of 75%, which has between 0.1 and 0.6% less error compared to the other overlaps (80, 85 and 90%). For 8 m and an overlap of 90%, an error of 1.1% was made. At 10 m, the least error was obtained (0.6%) with an overlap of 75 and 85%, the other overlaps (80 and 90%) have an error difference of 0.5% compared to overlaps of 75 and 85%. For 15 m, the least error (2.8%) was obtained with an overlap of 75%, which has 0.2% less error compared to overlaps of 80 and 90%. Moreover, the error is reduced by more than 5.9% compared to the overlap of 85%. At 20 m, the least error (3.5%) is obtained with an overlap of 80%, which is 1.2 and 1.3% less error compared to 90 and 75% overlaps respectively. The error is further reduced, up to 5.7% compared to the 85% overlap. For 25 m, the least error (6.9%) was obtained with an overlap of 80%, which has 1.9 and 2% less error compared to overlaps of 75 and 90%, respectively, while compared to the overlap of 85% the error is reduced by 7.1%. For 30 m, the least error was obtained (13.6%) with an overlap of 90%, which is between 2.3 and 3.1% less error compared to the other overlaps (75, 80 and 90%). At 40 m, the least error was obtained (47.0%) with an overlap of 85%, which has between 9 and 14% less error compared to the other overlaps (75, 80 and 90%). From Figure 9c, it is observed that the measurement of widths has less error than the measurement of bump depth. The error obtained is reduced compared to the analysis for medium severity potholes. Additionally, note that for up to a 30-m measuring height, the error does not exceed 10.5% for the different overlaps and at 40 m, the overlap of 75% is the only one that exceeds 20% error, while the other overlaps do not exceed 14% error. At 2 m, the least error was obtained (0%) with an overlap of 80%, while for other overlaps the error was less than 1.6%. At 5 m, the minimum error value (0.5%) was obtained with an overlap of 80%, which has between 0.5 and 1% less error compared to the other overlaps (75, 85 and 90%). For 8 m and an overlap of 90%, an error of 0.3% was made, which is the lowest for this height, comparing this error with respect to overlaps of 75 and 80% there is a difference between 1.9 and 0.9% less error respectively, more so, the error is reduced by 2.7% compared to an overlap of 85%. At 10 m, the least error was obtained (0.3%) with an overlap of 80 and 85%, the other overlaps (70 and 90%) have an error difference of 0.4% compared to overlaps of 75 and 85%.