4.7 Article

Design and analysis of numerical experiments to compare four canopy reflectance models

期刊

REMOTE SENSING OF ENVIRONMENT
卷 79, 期 1, 页码 72-83

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00240-1

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A method designed to Study the relative effects of the input parameters of any model has been investigated with canopy reflectance (CR) models. Traditionally. sensitivity analyses are performed by changing one input parameter at a time. Such an approach is limited because it lacks strategy. A promising alternative is in the use of design of experiments, a statistical method that allows defining a structured and restricted number of simulations for which all input parameters vary simultaneously. This approach is especially helpful in multidimensional parameter spaces. It is demonstrated using four 1 D radiative transfer models that are compared in direct mode. These models are combinations of the PROSPECT]ear optical properties model with the four CR models. SAIL (Scattering and Arbitrarily Inclined Leaves), KUUSK. IAPI, and NADI (New Advanced DIscrete model). The sensitivity studies were conducted in the visible/near-infrared on the following parameters: the leaf structure (N), the chlorophyll-a and -b content (C-ab), the leaf area index (LAI), the mean leaf inclination angle (theta (1)), the hot spot (s(1)), and the soil brightness (alpha (soil)). We compared simulated reflectances for a given set of measurement geometries and two wavebands of the POLDER (Polarization and Directionality of the Earth's Reflectances) spaceborne instrument. The relative effects of the biophysical parameters are assessed as well as their contribution to reflectance. allowing us to rank the most influential ones. Their interactions were also studied from the perspective of improving inversion procedures. Globally, the four models agree well in terms of computed reflectances and parameter effects, nevertheless with some discrepancies due to the implementation of different leaf angle distribution (LAD) functions. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

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