4.7 Article

An Extension of the Alpha Approximation Method for Soil Moisture Estimation Using Time-Series SAR Data Over Bare Soil Surfaces

Journal

IEEE GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING LETTERS
Volume 14, Issue 8, Pages 1328-1332

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/LGRS.2017.2711006

Keywords

Bare surface; soil moisture; synthetic aperture radar (SAR); time series

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [91437214, 41230747, 71461010701]
  2. Australian Research Council [DP0984586, LE0882509, FS100100040]
  3. Australian Research Council [FS100100040] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this letter is to extend the alpha approximation method, a method proposed by Balenzano et al., for soil moisture retrieval from multitemporal synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data. The original alpha approach requires an initial estimate of the upper and lower bound soil moisture values to constrain the soil moisture retrieval. This letter demonstrates an extension of the alpha approach by employing the juxtaposition method to adaptively set the soil moisture bounds using the absolute radar backscatter values. This extended alpha method was tested using an airborne time series of L-band SAR data and coincident ground measurements acquired during the SMAPEx-3 experiment over bare agricultural fields. The agreement between estimated and measured soil moisture values was within a rootmean-square error of 0.07 cm(3)/cm(3) for each of the three polarization combinations used (i.e., HH, VV, and HH and VV). Moreover, inclusion of the two-polarization combination (HH and VV) slightly improved the retrieval performance. The proposed extension to the alpha method makes the most of the information contained in the SAR data time series by using dynamic, spatially explicit soil moisture bounds retrieved from the SAR data themselves.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available