4.6 Article

TIEOF: Algorithm for Recovery of Missing Multidimensional Satellite Data on Water Bodies Based on Higher-Order Tensor Decompositions

Journal

WATER
Volume 13, Issue 18, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/w13182578

Keywords

satellite observations of water bodies; missing data reconstruction; higher-order tensor decomposition; chlorophyll; lake baikal

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation [075-15-2019-1659]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, a method called Tensor Interpolating Empirical Orthogonal Functions (TIEOF) is proposed to reconstruct missing data from remote sensors. The method relies on high-order tensor decomposition and shows a 69% improvement compared to the current state-of-the-art DINEOF algorithm in various data scenarios.
Satellite research methods are frequently used in observations of water bodies. One of the most important problems in satellite observations is the presence of missing data due to internal malfunction of satellite sensors and poor atmospheric conditions. We proceeded on the assumption that the use of data recovery methods based on spatial relationships in data can increase the recovery accuracy. In this paper, we present a method for missing data reconstruction from remote sensors. We refer our method to as Tensor Interpolating Empirical Orthogonal Functions (TIEOF). The method relies on the two-dimensional nature of sensor images and organizes the data into three-dimensional tensors. We use high-order tensor decomposition to interpolate missing data on chlorophyll a concentration in lake Baikal (Russia, Siberia). Using MODIS and SeaWiFS satellite data of lake Baikal we show that the observed improvement of TIEOF was 69% on average compared to the current state-of-the-art DINEOF algorithm measured in various preprocessing data scenarios including thresholding and different interpolating schemes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available