2018
DOI: 10.1109/tgrs.2017.2762462
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Soil Moisture Retrieval From SMAP: A Validation and Error Analysis Study Using Ground-Based Observations Over the Little Washita Watershed

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
32
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
5
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We also investigated the responses of the HH-pol, and VV-pol backscatter of and to in-situ soil moisture to explore whether the correlation between the backscattering coefficient and soil moisture had improved following the elimination of the contribution of vegetation, shown in Figure 8 . It is observed that all radar observations generally exhibit correlation with soil moisture, which is consistent with previous findings [ 8 ], demonstrating the good potential of GF-3 observations for estimating soil moisture. As expected, backscatter correlated better with soil moisture than for HH-pol and VV-pol ( R > 0.650, Table 4 ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We also investigated the responses of the HH-pol, and VV-pol backscatter of and to in-situ soil moisture to explore whether the correlation between the backscattering coefficient and soil moisture had improved following the elimination of the contribution of vegetation, shown in Figure 8 . It is observed that all radar observations generally exhibit correlation with soil moisture, which is consistent with previous findings [ 8 ], demonstrating the good potential of GF-3 observations for estimating soil moisture. As expected, backscatter correlated better with soil moisture than for HH-pol and VV-pol ( R > 0.650, Table 4 ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Passive microwave remote sensing can observe soil moisture with higher temporal resolution (e.g., 1~3 days) [ 7 ] than active radar especially the synthetic aperture radar (SAR) (typically the temporal resolution of a single SAR system is several weeks). However, passive radiometers often limits on spatial resolution (e.g., >25 km) while SAR can provide observations with much higher spatial resolution than the passive radiometers that can be used for many practical applications such as agricultural productivity estimation at a local scale [ 8 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A sensitivity analysis between the GF-3 total radar backscatter σ°(HH and VV polarizations) and in situ SMC was conducted based on all the eld measurements data to explore whether SMC could be retrieved directly using regression methods, as shown in Figure 5. GF-3 total radar backscatter σ°(HH and VV polarizations) was correlated with SMC, which is consistent with previous ndings [55], demonstrating the potential of GF-3 satellite data for SMC retrieval. However, R 2 between σ°and in situ SMC, both with HH and VV polarizations, was lower than 0.146 (Table 3), thus indicating that simple regression methods cannot achieve high-precision inversion of SMC.…”
Section: Correlations Between In Situ Smc and Correspondingsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…SMAP soil moisture estimates tend to dry-down faster than estimated soil moisture of the hillslopes which is consistent with the study on the SMAP moisture dry-down rates (Shellito et al, 2016) and an overall assessment of SMAP soil moisture products (Chan et al, 2016). Chen et al (2018) speculated that underestimation in auxiliary surface temperature of SMAP could be one of the contributors to dry-bias of SMAP soil moisture estimates.…”
Section: Basin-scale Soil Moisturesupporting
confidence: 87%