首页> 外文期刊>Remote Sensing of Environment: An Interdisciplinary Journal >Comparison between different sources of atmospheric profiles for land surface temperature retrieval from single channel thermal infrared data
【24h】

Comparison between different sources of atmospheric profiles for land surface temperature retrieval from single channel thermal infrared data

机译:从单通道热红外数据获取土地表面温度的不同大气剖面源之间的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Different sources of atmospheric water vapor and temperature profiles were used with a radiative transfer model for retrieving land surface temperature (LST) from thermal infrared remote sensing data with the so-called single channel (SC) method. Retrieved LSTs were compared to concurrent ground measurements over homogeneous rice fields to assess the accuracy of the atmospheric profiles. These included radiosonde balloons launched at the test site near-concurrently to satellite overpasses, re-analysis profiles from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), and satellite sounder products from the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) and the Moderate Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS; MOD07 product). SC LSTs were computed for Enhanced Thematic Mapper+ (ETM+), Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection radiometer (ASTER), MODIS, and Advanced Along-Track Scanning Radiometer (AATSR). Results show that radiosonde profiles provided the best agreement between ground-measured and satellite-derived LSTs, with root mean square difference (RMSD) better than 1.0K and biases within ±0.5K for most of the cases. As an alternative to radiosonde profiles, NCEP and MOD07 data yielded reasonable results with RMSDs around 1.0K, although LSTs derived from MOD07 profiles showed a slight overestimation (0.5 to 1.0K) of the ground LSTs. AIRS profiles usually underestimated the ground LSTs by 1 to 2K, probably due to the large temporal gap (2-3h) with the other satellite measurements. We propose a test to assess the suitability of atmospheric profiles applicable to sensors with bands at 11 and 12μm in the split-window. So this test plus the SC method may be called split-window SC algorithm, being significantly different from the simple SC method. It implies the calculation of the difference between the LST derived from both bands (T _(ig)-T _(jg)), which should be close to zero if the atmospheric profile is accurate and the surface emissivity is well known. A small range of T _(ig)-T _(jg) values around zero can be set for which the LST derived at 11μm is accurate. Using only the profiles passing the test, LSTs derived from MODIS band 31 agreed with the ground data with a mean bias of -0.1K (ground minus satellite) and RMSD of 0.6K, while AATSR band at 11μm yielded a -0.1K bias and RMSD=0.5K.
机译:大气中的水汽和温度分布图的不同来源与辐射转移模型一起使用,通过所谓的单通道(SC)方法从热红外遥感数据中检索地表温度(LST)。将检索到的LSTs与均质稻田上同时进行的地面测量进行比较,以评估大气廓线的准确性。这些包括在探空仪附近与卫星立交桥同时发射的探空仪气球,国家环境预测中心(NCEP)的重新分析资料以及大气红外测深仪(AIRS)和中度成像光谱仪(MODIS)的卫星测深仪产品; MOD07产品)。计算了SC LST,用于增强型专题测绘仪+(ETM +),先进的星载热发射和反射辐射计(ASTER),MODIS和先进的沿轨扫描辐射计(AATSR)。结果表明,探空仪剖面图在地面测量和卫星衍生的LST之间提供了最佳的一致性,在大多数情况下,均方根差(RMSD)优于1.0K,偏差在±0.5K之内。作为无线电探空仪剖面图的替代方法,尽管从MOD07剖面图得出的LST显示地面LST略有高估(0.5至1.0K),但NCEP和MOD07数据在1.0SD左右的RMSD处产生了合理的结果。 AIRS剖面图通常低估了地面LST的1至2K,这可能是由于与其他卫星测量值之间存在较大的时间间隔(2-3h)。我们提出了一项测试,以评估适用于分窗窗口中11和12μm波段传感器的大气廓线的适用性。因此,该测试加上SC方法可能被称为拆分窗口SC算法,与简单SC方法有很大的不同。这意味着要计算出从两个波段(T _(ig)-T _(jg))得出的LST之间的差,如果大气廓线准确且表面发射率众所周知,则该差应接近零。可以将T _(ig)-T _(jg)值的小范围设置为零,这样对于11μm的LST来说是准确的。仅使用通过测试的剖面,来自MODIS频带31的LST与地面数据相符,平均偏差为-0.1K(地面减去卫星),RMSD为0.6K,而在11μm的AATSR频带产生-0.1K偏差, RMSD = 0.5K。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号