4.7 Article

Evaluation of ten machine learning methods for estimating terrestrial evapotranspiration from remote sensing

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2019.01.020

关键词

Evapotranspiration; Latent heat exchange; Machine learning; Remote sensing; GLASS; MODIS; Regression tree; Neural network; Random kernel; Bootstrap aggregation tree; Flux tower; Surface radiation; Vegetation index; Leaf area index; FPAR; Albedo; Nadir adjusted reflectance; Regularized linear regression; Computational efficiency; Surface energy balance

资金

  1. United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
  2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
  3. U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Remote sensing retrieval of evapotranspiration (ET), or surface latent heat exchange (LE), is of great utility for many applications. Machine learning (ML) methods have been extensively used in many disciplines, but so far little work has been performed systematically comparing ML methods for ET retrieval. This paper provides an evaluation of ten ML methods for estimating daily ET based on daily Global LAnd Surface Satellite (GLASS) radiation data and high-level Moderate-Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MOD'S) data products and ground measured ET data from 184 flux tower sites. Measurements of accuracy (RMSE, R-2, and bias) and run time were made for each of ten ML methods with a smaller training data set (n = 7910 data points) and a larger training data set (n = 69,752 data points). Inclusion of more input variables improved algorithm performance but had little effect on run time. The best results were obtained with the larger training data set using the bootstrap aggregation (bagging) regression tree (validation RMSE = 19.91 W/m(2)) and three hidden layer neural network (validation RMSE = 20.94 W/m(2)), although the less computationally demanding random kernel (RKS) algorithm also produced good results (validation RMSE = 22.22 W/m(2)). Comparison of results from sites with different ecosystem types showed the best results for evergreen, shrub, and grassland sites, and the weakest results for wetland sites. Generally, performance was not improved by training with data from only the same ecosystem type.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据