MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402217881 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2024.3454377

Demonstrating the Suitability of the Radiance- Based Method for Assessing the Accuracy of MODIS Land Surface Temperature Products

2024· article· en· W4402217881 on OpenAlexfundno aff
César Coll, Raquel Niclòs, Jesús Puchades, Vicente García‐Santos, Martín Perelló, Lluís Pérez-Planells

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónGeneralitat Valenciana
KeywordsRadianceRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceRadiometryComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Validation of satellite land surface temperature (LST) products is usually performed through direct comparison with ground-measured LSTs (temperature-based or T-b validation) and with the radiance-based (R-b) method where reference ground LSTs are obtained from at-sensor radiances, atmospheric temperature and water vapor profiles, and emissivity measurements. While T-b is the preferred method, it is only applicable to a few, single-component covers that are thermally homogeneous from the ground measurement scale (a few m) to the satellite scale (usually 1 km). The indirect R-b method is an alternative to extend the LST validation at a global scale over cover types where the T-b method is not feasible. In this study, we used ground LST measurements taken in a thermally homogeneous site coincident with moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) Terra and Aqua overpasses (86 matchups) to assess the accuracy of the R-b LSTs derived from MODIS data. Mean bias (ground minus R-b LSTs) of −0.1 K and root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.8 K were obtained, showing good performance against ground measurements. Then, we apply operationally the R-b method for validating MODIS Level 2 LST products M*D11 and M*D21 over six test sites comprising a varied range of surfaces (4267 cases). The emissivity values necessary for the R-b calculations were obtained from 1) the M*D11 and M*D21 emissivity product and 2) an independently modeled emissivity using ground measurements and vegetation cover fraction estimates. For the M*D11 product, we obtained an overall bias (product minus R-b LST) of −0.5 K and RMSE of 0.9 K with either the product or the modeled emissivities. However, a significant difference was found between daytime and nighttime bias (−1.0 and 0.0 K, respectively). The daytime cold bias of M*D11 was attributed to an ill-tuning of the algorithm for high surface temperature and atmospheric humidity conditions. For the M*D21 product, the overall bias (RMSE) was 0.2 K (0.6 K) with the product emissivity, and 0.6 K (1.1 K) with the modeled emissivity, both in nighttime and daytime. These results compare well with recent studies and contribute to the global assessment of MODIS LST uncertainty.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207