1998
DOI: 10.1080/014311698215126
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of AVHRR filter functions on surface temperature estimation from the split window approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These coefficients account for effects such as those due to the atmosphere and air-sea interactions, improper sensor calibration, and possible contamination in the optical system (Yokoyama and Tanba, 1991). Since the different filter functions of the five successive AVHRR instruments may introduce errors into the application of the split-window equation (Czajkowski et al, 1998), only scenes recorded from the NOAA-14 platform have been included in this algorithm devel- (Wooster et al, 2001) when compared to the influence of seasonal variations and therefore the correction was neglected. Since no coefficients for the split-window technique have so far been determined for the Lake Constance region with its specific atmospheric characteristics, different algorithms were applied to the dataset and compared (Table 1, Fig.…”
Section: Application Of the Split-window Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%
“…These coefficients account for effects such as those due to the atmosphere and air-sea interactions, improper sensor calibration, and possible contamination in the optical system (Yokoyama and Tanba, 1991). Since the different filter functions of the five successive AVHRR instruments may introduce errors into the application of the split-window equation (Czajkowski et al, 1998), only scenes recorded from the NOAA-14 platform have been included in this algorithm devel- (Wooster et al, 2001) when compared to the influence of seasonal variations and therefore the correction was neglected. Since no coefficients for the split-window technique have so far been determined for the Lake Constance region with its specific atmospheric characteristics, different algorithms were applied to the dataset and compared (Table 1, Fig.…”
Section: Application Of the Split-window Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also examined the sensitivity of modeled NPP to key driving variables. Analyses of the surface environmental variable recoveries (T•, D, and CSI) are reported elsewhere [e.g., Czajkowski et al, 1997b;Prince et al, 1998].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…shown to be within 2øC rms error of field measurements at a diverse range of study sites[Czajkowski et al, 1997b; Prihodko and Goward, 1997; Prince et al, 1998]. Deviations of this magnitude may result in significant errors in energy balance calculations but the effect on plant growth is relatively smaller.…”
mentioning
confidence: 94%
“…GOES observations offer the possibility of surface radiometric temperature observations at a higher temporal frequency (hourly as opposed to daily) and finer spatial resolution (2‐km as opposed to 1°). Following Czajkowski et al [1998], surface temperature retrieval from GOES channel 4 and 5 observations were based on the split‐window approach described in Rhoads et al [2001]. GOES radiometric surface temperature products were taken from 1/8° degree resolution data generated for the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%