• DocumentCode
    1765335
  • Title

    Assessment of Spectral, Misregistration, and Spatial Uncertainties Inherent in the Cross-Calibration Study

  • Author

    Chander, G. ; Helder, Dennis ; Aaron, D. ; Mishra, Nitesh ; Shrestha, A.K.

  • Author_Institution
    Earth Resources Obs. & Sci. (EROS) Center, U.S. Geol. Survey, Sioux Falls, SD, USA
  • Volume
    51
  • Issue
    3
  • fYear
    2013
  • fDate
    41334
  • Firstpage
    1282
  • Lastpage
    1296
  • Abstract
    Cross-calibration of satellite sensors permits the quantitative comparison of measurements obtained from different Earth Observing (EO) systems. Cross-calibration studies usually use simultaneous or near-simultaneous observations from several spaceborne sensors to develop band-by-band relationships through regression analysis. The investigation described in this paper focuses on evaluation of the uncertainties inherent in the cross-calibration process, including contributions due to different spectral responses, spectral resolution, spectral filter shift, geometric misregistrations, and spatial resolutions. The hyperspectral data from the Environmental Satellite SCanning Imaging Absorption SpectroMeter for Atmospheric CartograpHY and the EO-1 Hyperion, along with the relative spectral responses (RSRs) from the Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper (TM) Plus and the Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer sensors, were used for the spectral uncertainty study. The data from Landsat 5 TM over five representative land cover types (desert, rangeland, grassland, deciduous forest, and coniferous forest) were used for the geometric misregistrations and spatial-resolution study. The spectral resolution uncertainty was found to be within 0.25%, spectral filter shift within 2.5%, geometric misregistrations within 0.35%, and spatial-resolution effects within 0.1% for the Libya 4 site. The one-sigma uncertainties presented in this paper are uncorrelated, and therefore, the uncertainties can be summed orthogonally. Furthermore, an overall total uncertainty was developed. In general, the results suggested that the spectral uncertainty is more dominant compared to other uncertainties presented in this paper. Therefore, the effect of the sensor RSR differences needs to be quantified and compensated to avoid large uncertainties in cross-calibration results.
  • Keywords
    artificial satellites; calibration; geophysical equipment; uncertainty handling; EO-1 Hyperion; Earth Observing systems; Environmental Satellite SCanning Imaging Absorption SpectroMeter for Atmospheric CartograpHY; Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus; Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer; band-by-band relationship; coniferous forest; cross calibration; deciduous forest; desert; geometric misregistrations; grassland; misregistration uncertainty; one sigma uncertainty; rangeland; regression analysis; satellite sensors; spatial resolution; spatial uncertainty; spectral filter shift; spectral resolution; spectral uncertainty; Absorption; Hyperspectral sensors; MODIS; Satellites; Sensors; Spatial resolution; Uncertainty; Earth Observing-1 Hyperion; Environmental Satellite (Envisat) SCanning Imaging Absorption SpectroMeter for Atmospheric CartograpHY (SCIAMACHY); Landsat 7 (L7) Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+); Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS); geometric misregistration; radiometric cross-calibration; relative spectral response (RSR); spatial resolution; spectral band adjustment factor (SBAF); spectral filter shift; spectral resolution; spectral responses; uncertainties;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Journal_Title
    Geoscience and Remote Sensing, IEEE Transactions on
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • ISSN
    0196-2892
  • Type

    jour

  • DOI
    10.1109/TGRS.2012.2228008
  • Filename
    6392255