Liujun Zhu;Junjie Dai;Junliang Jin;Shanshui Yuan;Ziwei Xiong;Jeffrey P. Walker
{"title":"Are the Current Expectations for SAR Remote Sensing of Soil Moisture Using Machine Learning Overoptimistic?","authors":"Liujun Zhu;Junjie Dai;Junliang Jin;Shanshui Yuan;Ziwei Xiong;Jeffrey P. Walker","doi":"10.1109/TGRS.2025.3533927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"High-resolution surface soil moisture is essential for advancing various applications. The increased synthetic aperture radar (SAR) missions over the past decade present an opportunity to obtain large-scale, high-resolution soil moisture data. Machine learning methods are increasingly used for this purpose, but they generally suffered from the availability of ground-based observations. The real performance in view of a global product is still unclear. Consequently, commonly used machine learning methods were evaluated in this study in simulated global mapping scenarios with few training data, using a global dataset of 209 318 samples from 1021 locations worldwide, and a unique regional dataset with intensive ground and airborne-derived soil moisture from L-band passive microwave observations. Three evaluation scenarios based on the global dataset were involved, with ≤5% samples used for training. The target accuracy of 0.06 m3/m3 was only met in the dependent evaluation scenario, where the training and testing samples were randomly split. In the temporal evaluation scenario and spatial evaluation scenario, where training and testing samples came from different time periods or locations, the best models achieved median root-mean-square errors (RMSEs) of only 0.078 and 0.089 m3/m3, respectively. The evaluation on the regional dataset showed consistently worse accuracy statistics (RMSE > 0.1 m3/m3 and R < 0.41). Moreover, all methods failed to capture the spatial patterns of soil moisture, compared to airborne-derived passive soil moisture maps. These findings, therefore, suggest that current expectations for SAR-based soil moisture estimation using machine learning may be overoptimistic, requiring more robust approaches for scenarios with sparse ground measurements.","PeriodicalId":13213,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing","volume":"63 ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10852337/","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
High-resolution surface soil moisture is essential for advancing various applications. The increased synthetic aperture radar (SAR) missions over the past decade present an opportunity to obtain large-scale, high-resolution soil moisture data. Machine learning methods are increasingly used for this purpose, but they generally suffered from the availability of ground-based observations. The real performance in view of a global product is still unclear. Consequently, commonly used machine learning methods were evaluated in this study in simulated global mapping scenarios with few training data, using a global dataset of 209 318 samples from 1021 locations worldwide, and a unique regional dataset with intensive ground and airborne-derived soil moisture from L-band passive microwave observations. Three evaluation scenarios based on the global dataset were involved, with ≤5% samples used for training. The target accuracy of 0.06 m3/m3 was only met in the dependent evaluation scenario, where the training and testing samples were randomly split. In the temporal evaluation scenario and spatial evaluation scenario, where training and testing samples came from different time periods or locations, the best models achieved median root-mean-square errors (RMSEs) of only 0.078 and 0.089 m3/m3, respectively. The evaluation on the regional dataset showed consistently worse accuracy statistics (RMSE > 0.1 m3/m3 and R < 0.41). Moreover, all methods failed to capture the spatial patterns of soil moisture, compared to airborne-derived passive soil moisture maps. These findings, therefore, suggest that current expectations for SAR-based soil moisture estimation using machine learning may be overoptimistic, requiring more robust approaches for scenarios with sparse ground measurements.
期刊介绍:
IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing (TGRS) is a monthly publication that focuses on the theory, concepts, and techniques of science and engineering as applied to sensing the land, oceans, atmosphere, and space; and the processing, interpretation, and dissemination of this information.