MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157721817 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2002.807579

Atmospheric correction of Landsat ETM+ land surface imagery. II. Validation and applications

2002· article· en· W2157721817 on OpenAlexafffund
Shunlin Liang, Hongliang Fang, J. T. Morisette, Mingzhen Chen, Chad J Shuey, C.L. Walthall, Craig S. T. Daughtry

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersBhabha Atomic Research CentreUniversity College LondonUniversity of TorontoU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsAtmospheric correctionRemote sensingThematic MapperSeaWiFSEnvironmental scienceModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerSpectroradiometerLand coverMultispectral imageAtmospheric modelImage resolutionRadiometryAtmospheric opticsAlbedo (alchemy)Computer scienceSatellite imageryReflectivityGeologyMeteorologyArtificial intelligenceSatelliteLand useGeographyOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For pt.I see ibid., vol.39, no.11, p.2490-8 (2001). This is the second paper of the series on atmospheric correction of Enhanced Thematic Mapper-Plus (ETM+) land surface imagery. In the first paper, a new algorithm that corrects heterogeneous aerosol scattering and surface adjacency effects was presented. In this study, our objectives are to (1) evaluate the accuracy of this new atmospheric correction algorithm using ground radiometric measurements, (2) apply this algorithm to correct Moderate-Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and SeaWiFS imagery, and (3) demonstrate how much atmospheric correction of ETM+ imagery can improve land cover classification, change detection, and broadband albedo calculations. Validation results indicate that this new algorithm can retrieve surface reflectance from ETM+ imagery accurately. All experimental cases demonstrate that this algorithm can be used for correcting both MODIS and SeaWiFS imagery. Although more tests and validation exercises are needed, it has been proven promising to correct different multispectral imagery operationally. We have also demonstrated that atmospheric correction does matter.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations125
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207