Journal of Geo-information Science >
Comparison and Analysis of Remotely Sensed Time Series of Reconstruction Models at Various Intervals
Received date: 2015-12-22
Request revised date: 2016-04-25
Online published: 2016-10-25
Copyright
Remotely sensed time series are being widely used in land surface information detection. However, influenced by the sensors and external conditions, different levels of noises exist in the remotely sensed time series. Although reconstruction models can reduce the noises in times series effectively, different reconstruction models provide different levels of accuracy when they are used at various intervals. This study took the city of Chaoyang in Liaoning Province as a case. We utilized the time series of Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) at intervals of 1-day, 4-day, 8-day, 16-day and 30-day, respectively, to carry out experiments of simulation and phenology observation. We also assessed the reconstruction results of the SG filter model, the DL fitting model and the HANTS model based on their capabilities of keeping waveform of time series and their accuracy of phenological date extraction. In addition, we also analyzed sensitivity of these three models to various intervals. The results showed that the SG filter model performed better at larger intervals, the DL fitting model gave better reconstruction accuracy at smaller intervals and the Hants model gave better accuracy when it is used at larger intervals. Moreover, the reasons of the different performance of the three reconstruction models were analyzed from the theories of these models. On this basis, we gave the suggestions on the choice of reconstruction models of time series at different intervals.
Key words: remote sensing; time series; reconstruction model; time intervals
ZHOU Huihui , WANG Nan , HUANG Yao , WANG Jinnian , ZhANG Lifu . Comparison and Analysis of Remotely Sensed Time Series of Reconstruction Models at Various Intervals[J]. Journal of Geo-information Science, 2016 , 18(10) : 1410 -1417 . DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1047.2016.01410
Fig. 1 Location of the study area图1 研究区地理位置 |
Tab. 1 The phenological stages and corresponding dates recorded at observational sites表1 地面站点记录的物候发育期及对应日期 |
出苗 | 拔节 | 抽穗 | 乳熟 | 成熟 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
日期 | 5月22日 | 6月28日 | 7月24日 | 8月26日 | 9月18日 |
Tab. 2 Statistical indicators and the computing methods表2 统计指标及其计算方法 |
指标名称 | 意义 | 指标名称 | 意义 |
---|---|---|---|
MIN | 时间序列最小值 | MIN_t | 时间序列最小值出现时间 |
MAX | 时间序列最大值 | MAX_t | 时间序列最大值出现时间 |
MID | 时间序列中值 | MID_t | 时间序列中值出现时间 |
MEAN | 时间序列平均值 |
Tab. 3 Phenological stages and the retrieval methods表3 物候期名称及其提取方法 |
物候期名称 | 含义 | 计算方法 |
---|---|---|
出苗 | 幼苗出土,NDVI开始上升 | 上升期曲率最大值对应时间 |
拔节 | 茎快速伸长,NDVI上升最快阶段 | 上升期曲线导数最大值对应时间 |
抽穗 | 发育完全,NDVI达到全年最大阶段 | 时间序列最大值对应时间 |
乳熟 | NDVI开始下降 | 下降期曲线最大值对应时间 |
成熟 | NDVI下降最快阶段 | 下降期曲率导数最大值对应时间 |
Fig. 2 Correlation coefficient and relative error of statistical metrics between reconstructed and ideal data of different time interval图2 不同时间间隔下重构数据与模拟理想数据的相关系数以及提取统计指标的相对误差 |
Fig. 3 The reconstruction results of time series at4-day-interval using the three models图3 4 d间隔下的各模型重构结果图 |
Fig 4 The reconstruction results of time series at16-day-interval using the three models图4 16 d间隔下的各模型重构结果图 |
Fig. 5 The reconstruction results of time series at30-day-interval using the three models图5 30 d间隔下的各模型重构效果图 |
Fig. 6 The error histograms of phenological dates derived from reconstructed data by the three models图6 3种模型重构数据所提物候期的误差直方图 |
Fig. 7 The mean of 5 phenological dates' error derivedfrom the reconstructed data of different models图7 不同模型重构数据的5项物候期误差平均值 |
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
[1] |
[
|
[2] |
|
[3] |
|
[4] |
|
[5] |
|
[6] |
|
[7] |
|
[8] |
|
[9] |
|
[10] |
[
|
[11] |
|
[12] |
|
[13] |
[
|
[14] |
[
|
[15] |
[
|
[16] |
|
[17] |
[
|
[18] |
|
[19] |
[
|
/
〈 | 〉 |