2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2005.03.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of the net radiation using MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) data for clear sky days

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
237
0
32

Year Published

2009
2009
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 324 publications
(275 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
6
237
0
32
Order By: Relevance
“…Using Aqua satellite data the RMSE of T a was 2.6°C and 3.2 hpa of e a . As shown by the data, the magnitude of the experimental errors generally corresponded to previous studies (Bisht et al 2005;Ryu et al 2008;Bisht and Bras 2010). One intriguing point is that the SMK site yielded a smaller "inter-instrumental" difference (i.e., RMSE) in T a and a larger difference in e a compared to the CFK site.…”
Section: R Ld From Flux Towerssupporting
confidence: 82%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Using Aqua satellite data the RMSE of T a was 2.6°C and 3.2 hpa of e a . As shown by the data, the magnitude of the experimental errors generally corresponded to previous studies (Bisht et al 2005;Ryu et al 2008;Bisht and Bras 2010). One intriguing point is that the SMK site yielded a smaller "inter-instrumental" difference (i.e., RMSE) in T a and a larger difference in e a compared to the CFK site.…”
Section: R Ld From Flux Towerssupporting
confidence: 82%
“…3 (Bisht et al 2005;Ryu et al 2008;Bisht and Bras 2010). Ryu et al (2008) compared MODIS air temperature (T a ) and actual vapor pressure (e a ) from the Terra satellite with flux tower measurements.…”
Section: R Ld From Flux Towersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kim and Hogue (2008) found better correlation (R 2 5 0.89) and lower bias (20.34 mm day 21 ) in point-to-grid comparisons of daily M-PET and observed PET for humid sites. Our correlations are slightly lower most likely because 1) we are comparing to basin-scale PET as opposed to point-to-grid comparisons and 2) we include only May-September whereas Kim and Hogue (Barik 2014) confirm that M-PET slightly overestimates PET as compared to groundbased measurements, likely because of the observed biases in MODIS surface temperature products (Wan et al 2002;Bisht et al 2005). …”
Section: A Assessment Of M-pet and Default-petmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…Net radiations for vegetation and bare soil within pixels can be respectively estimated using equation (17) and the specific parameters of land type. In the Sim-ReSET model, a simple scheme proposed by Bisht et al (2005) was used to estimate instantaneous net radiation for cloud-free days only using remote sensing observations. Their results show that the accuracy of net radiation estimations by their scheme is better than 50 W/m 2 .…”
Section: Net Radiationmentioning
confidence: 99%