2019
DOI: 10.1109/lgrs.2019.2905578
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Geophysical Model Function for Wind Speed Retrieval From C-Band HH-Polarized Synthetic Aperture Radar

Abstract: Synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery is routinely acquired at HH-polarization in high latitude areas for measuring surface wind over the ocean. However, in the contrary of VV-polarization, there is no HHpolarization geophysical model function (GMF) exists to directly retrieve wind speed from SAR images. In general, HH-polarized Normalized Radar Cross Section (NRCS) is thus converted into VV-polarization and then conventional CMOD functions are used with auxiliary wind direction information for wind speed ret… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Observed RS‐2 quad‐pol SAR measurements are illustrated using blue plus signs (+) in Figure 4. Moreover, we also estimate HH‐, VV‐, and HV‐pol NRCS with three empirical GMFs, namely, CMODH (Zhang et al, 2019), CMOD5.N (Hersbach, 2010), and MS1A (A. Mouche et al, 2017), and calculations are shown as the orange circle lines, yellow diamond lines, and purple square lines, in Figure 4. Thus, we compare RS‐2 observations and GMF estimates with CB and SSA‐2 simulations.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Observed RS‐2 quad‐pol SAR measurements are illustrated using blue plus signs (+) in Figure 4. Moreover, we also estimate HH‐, VV‐, and HV‐pol NRCS with three empirical GMFs, namely, CMODH (Zhang et al, 2019), CMOD5.N (Hersbach, 2010), and MS1A (A. Mouche et al, 2017), and calculations are shown as the orange circle lines, yellow diamond lines, and purple square lines, in Figure 4. Thus, we compare RS‐2 observations and GMF estimates with CB and SSA‐2 simulations.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, we also estimate HH-, VV-, and HV-pol NRCS with three empirical GMFs, namely, CMODH (Zhang et al, 2019), CMOD5.N (Hersbach, 2010), and MS1A (A. Mouche et al, 2017), and calculations are shown as the orange circle lines, yellow diamond lines, and purple square lines, in Figure 4.…”
Section: Journal Of Geophysical Research: Oceansmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The comparison with buoy measurements has a bias of 0.12 m/s and an RMSE of 1.42 m/s. A recent study [29]shows that the retrieval of by S1 HH-polarized data using the CMODH [12] has a bias of 0.49 m/s and an RMSE of 2.05 m/s compared with buoy measurements. This suggests that the proposed machine learning-type retrieval method can also yield accurate estimates of but avoids the complicatedly tuning of coefficients in the CMOD functions.…”
Section: B Comparison Of the Sar-retrieved With In Situ Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the dependence of PR is not only on incidence angle [7] - [9] but also on SSW conditions [8], [10]. While PR depends on various factors, one can also develop independent GMFs for HH-polarized spaceborne SAR data, e.g., as proposed by Monaldo et al [11] for the Radarsat data and by Zhang et al [12] for ENVISAT/ASAR data in HH polarization. This should be an optimized method to retrieve SSW by spaceborne SAR in HH polarization, as the PR may depend on various factors through nonlinear relations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%