2018
DOI: 10.3390/rs10071131
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Consideration of Radiometric Quantization Error in Satellite Sensor Cross-Calibration

Abstract: The radiometric resolution of a satellite sensor refers to the smallest increment in the spectral radiance that can be detected by the imaging sensor. The fewer bits that are used for signal discretization, the larger the quantization error in the measured radiance. In satellite inter-calibration, a difference in radiometric resolution between a reference and a target sensor can induce a calibration bias, if not properly accounted for. The effect is greater for satellites with a quadratic count response, such … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The assessment of uncertainty in SNO cross-calibration results involves the consideration of various factors, including measurement noise from the monitored instrument, calibration uncertainties from the reference instrument, data matching errors, and uncertainty in regression analysis, all of which require further investigation. Recently, the actual observation data of two specific satellites during the calibration were analyzed to assess the uncertainty of calibration results [20][21][22]. However, the quantification and analysis of uncertainty within the calibration process itself have not been extensively explored [23,24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The assessment of uncertainty in SNO cross-calibration results involves the consideration of various factors, including measurement noise from the monitored instrument, calibration uncertainties from the reference instrument, data matching errors, and uncertainty in regression analysis, all of which require further investigation. Recently, the actual observation data of two specific satellites during the calibration were analyzed to assess the uncertainty of calibration results [20][21][22]. However, the quantification and analysis of uncertainty within the calibration process itself have not been extensively explored [23,24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSTARS.2022.3176141 the clouds and the Earth's radiant energy system record (2000 to the present), most GEO imagers have implemented 10-b quantization [7]. However, in existing convolutional neural network (CNN)based ship detection methods, the training samples are generally 8-b images.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, because the Landsat-8 OLI and Sentinel-2 sensors are both polar-orbiting and sun-synchronous, they can provide medium spatial resolution satellite data, allowing for better mapping and monitoring of the Earth’s surface (Li and Roy, 2017; Kosari et al , 2020). For the performance of vicarious calibration, the natural or artificial sites on the Earth’s surface were used for calibration of satellite sensors (Biggar et al , 2003; Cao et al , 2004), such as vicarious calibration of the HJ-A CCD-1 sensors (Zhong et al , 2014), Beijing-1 multispectral imagers (Chen et al , 2014) and FY-3 (Yang et al , 2017), and also cross-calibration of GMS-5 (Bhatt et al , 2018) and ASTER (Obata et al , 2015). Many studies have been performed on the radiometric calibration of the Sentinel-2 sensor (Main-Knorn et al , 2017; Chastain et al , 2019; Pahlevan et al , 2019; Revel et al , 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%