The Assessment of Cross Calibration/Validation Accuracy for KOMPSAT-3 Using Landsat 8 and 6S

Cheonggil Jin, Chuluong Choi
{"title":"The Assessment of Cross Calibration/Validation Accuracy for KOMPSAT-3 Using Landsat 8 and 6S","authors":"Cheonggil Jin, Chuluong Choi","doi":"10.7780/KJRS.2021.37.1.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we performed cross calibration of KOMPSAT-3 AEISS imaging sensor with reference to normalized pixels in the Landsat 8 OLI scenes of homogenous ROI recorded by both sensors between January 2014 and December 2019 at the Libya 4 PICS. Cross calibration is using images from a stable and well-calibrated satellite sensor as references to harmonize measurements from other sensors and/or characterize other sensors. But cross calibration has two problems; RSR and temporal difference. The RSR of KOMPSAT-3 and Landsat 8 are similar at the blue and green bands. But the red and NIR bands have a large difference. So we calculate SBAF of each sensor. We compared the SBAF estimated from the TOA Radiance simulation with KOMPSAT-3 and Landsat 8, the results displayed a difference of about 2.07~2.92% and 0.96~1.21% in the VIS and NIR bands. Before SBAF, Reflectance and Radiance difference was 0.42~23.23%. Case of difference temporal, we simulated by 6S and Landsat 8 for alignment the same acquisition time. The SBAF-corrected cross calibration coefficients using KOMPSAT-3, 6S and simulated Landsat 8 compared to the initial cross calibration without correction demonstrated a percentage difference in the spectral bands of about 0.866~1.192%. KOMPSAT-3 maximum uncertainty was estimated at 3.26~3.89%; errors due to atmospheric condition minimized to less than 1% (via 6S); Maximum deviation of KOMPSAT-3 DN was less than 1%. As the result, the results affirm that SBAF and 6s simulation enhanced cross-calibration accuracy.","PeriodicalId":38304,"journal":{"name":"遥感学报","volume":"37 1","pages":"123-137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"遥感学报","FirstCategoryId":"1089","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7780/KJRS.2021.37.1.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this study, we performed cross calibration of KOMPSAT-3 AEISS imaging sensor with reference to normalized pixels in the Landsat 8 OLI scenes of homogenous ROI recorded by both sensors between January 2014 and December 2019 at the Libya 4 PICS. Cross calibration is using images from a stable and well-calibrated satellite sensor as references to harmonize measurements from other sensors and/or characterize other sensors. But cross calibration has two problems; RSR and temporal difference. The RSR of KOMPSAT-3 and Landsat 8 are similar at the blue and green bands. But the red and NIR bands have a large difference. So we calculate SBAF of each sensor. We compared the SBAF estimated from the TOA Radiance simulation with KOMPSAT-3 and Landsat 8, the results displayed a difference of about 2.07~2.92% and 0.96~1.21% in the VIS and NIR bands. Before SBAF, Reflectance and Radiance difference was 0.42~23.23%. Case of difference temporal, we simulated by 6S and Landsat 8 for alignment the same acquisition time. The SBAF-corrected cross calibration coefficients using KOMPSAT-3, 6S and simulated Landsat 8 compared to the initial cross calibration without correction demonstrated a percentage difference in the spectral bands of about 0.866~1.192%. KOMPSAT-3 maximum uncertainty was estimated at 3.26~3.89%; errors due to atmospheric condition minimized to less than 1% (via 6S); Maximum deviation of KOMPSAT-3 DN was less than 1%. As the result, the results affirm that SBAF and 6s simulation enhanced cross-calibration accuracy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用Landsat 8和6S对KOMPSAT-3交叉校准/验证精度的评估
在这项研究中,我们参考了2014年1月至2019年12月在利比亚4 PICS记录的Landsat 8 OLI均匀ROI场景中的归一化像素,对KOMPSAT-3 AEISS成像传感器进行了交叉校准。交叉校准是使用来自稳定和校准良好的卫星传感器的图像作为参考,以协调来自其他传感器的测量和/或表征其他传感器。但交叉标定存在两个问题;RSR与时间差异。KOMPSAT-3和Landsat - 8的RSR在蓝带和绿带相似。但是红色和近红外波段有很大的不同。因此,我们计算了每个传感器的SBAF。通过与KOMPSAT-3和Landsat - 8的比较,发现在可见光波段和近红外波段SBAF的差异分别为2.07~2.92%和0.96~1.21%。SBAF前,反射率和辐亮度差为0.42~23.23%。在时间差异的情况下,我们用6S和Landsat 8模拟了同一采集时间的对准。与未经校正的初始交叉校准相比,经saf校正后的KOMPSAT-3、6S和模拟Landsat 8交叉校准系数在光谱波段上的百分比差异约为0.866~1.192%。估计KOMPSAT-3的最大不确定度为3.26~3.89%;大气条件误差降到小于1%(通过6S);KOMPSAT-3 DN的最大偏差小于1%。结果表明,SBAF和6s模拟提高了交叉校准精度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
遥感学报
遥感学报 Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3200
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
Combining solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence and optical vegetation indices to better understand plant phenological responses to global change Simulating potential tree height for beech-maple-birch forests in northeastern United States on Google Earth Engine Globe230k: A benchmark dense-pixel annotation dataset for global land cover mapping Urban renewal mapping: A case study in Beijing from 2000 to 2020 Improved fine-scale tropical forest cover mapping for Southeast Asia using Planet-NICFI and Sentinel-1 imagery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1