Literature DB >> 31057196

Implications of sensor inconsistencies and remote sensing error in the use of small unmanned aerial systems for generation of information products for agricultural management.

Mac McKee1, Ayman Nassar1, Alfonso Torres-Rua1, Mahyar Aboutalebi1, William Kustas2.   

Abstract

Small, unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) for remote sensing represent a relatively new and growing technology to support decisions for agricultural operations. The size and power limitations of these systems present challenges for the weight, size, and capability of the sensors that can be carried, as well as the geographical coverage that is possible. These factors, together with a lack of standards for sensor technology, its deployment, and data analysis, lead to uncertainties in data quality that can be difficult to detect or characterize. These, in turn, limit comparability between data from different sources and, more importantly, imply limits on the analyses that can be accomplished with the data that are acquired with sUAS. This paper offers a simple statistical examination of the implications toward information products of an array of sensor data uncertainty issues. The analysis relies upon high-resolution data collected in 2016 over a commercial vineyard, located near Lodi, California, for the USD A Agricultural Research Service Grape Remote sensing Atmospheric Profile and Evapotranspiration experiment (GRAPEX) Program. A Monte Carlo analysis is offered of how uncertainty in sensor spectral response and/or orthorectification accuracy can affect the estimation of information products of potential interest to growers, as illustrated in the form of common vegetation indices.

Keywords:  orthorectification accuracy; remote sensing; spectral response; uncertainty; unmanned autonomous vehicle

Year:  2018        PMID: 31057196      PMCID: PMC6491049          DOI: 10.1117/12.2305826

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng        ISSN: 0277-786X


  3 in total

1.  Automatic extraction of ground control regions and orthorectification of remote sensing imagery.

Authors:  Cheng-Chien Liu; Po-Li Chen
Journal:  Opt Express       Date:  2009-05-11       Impact factor: 3.894

2.  Adjusting spectral indices for spectral response function differences of very high spatial resolution sensors simulated from field spectra.

Authors:  Sharon L Cundill; Harald M A van der Werff; Mark van der Meijde
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 3.576

3.  Vicarious Calibration of sUAS Microbolometer Temperature Imagery for Estimation of Radiometric Land Surface Temperature.

Authors:  Alfonso Torres-Rua
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 3.576

  3 in total
  3 in total

1.  Implications of Soil and Canopy Temperature Uncertainty in the Estimation of Surface Energy Fluxes Using TSEB2T and High-resolution Imagery in Commercial Vineyards.

Authors:  Ayman Nassar; Alfonso Torres-Rua; William Kustas; Hector Nieto; Mac McKee; Lawrence Hipps; Joseph Alfieri; John Prueger; Maria Mar Alsina; Lynn McKee; Calvin Coopmans; Luis Sanchez; Nick Dokoozlian
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2020-05-26

2.  To What Extend Does the Eddy Covariance Footprint Cutoff Influence the Estimation of Surface Energy Fluxes Using Two Source Energy Balance Model and High-Resolution Imagery in Commercial Vineyards?

Authors:  Ayman Nassar; Alfonso Torres-Rua; William Kustas; Hector Nieto; Mac McKee; Lawrence Hipps; Joseph Alfieri; John Prueger; Maria Mar Alsina; Lynn McKee; Calvin Coopmans; Luis Sanchez; Nick Dokoozlian
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2020-05-26

3.  Influence of Model Grid Size on the Estimation of Surface Fluxes Using the Two Source Energy Balance Model and sUAS Imagery in Vineyards.

Authors:  Ayman Nassar; Alfonso Torres-Rua; William Kustas; Hector Nieto; Mac McKee; Lawrence Hipps; David Stevens; Joseph Alfieri; John Prueger; Maria Mar Alsina; Lynn McKee; Calvin Coopmans; Luis Sanchez; Nick Dokoozlian
Journal:  Remote Sens (Basel)       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 4.848

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.