atmospheric correction quality control for Rrs

Use this Forum to find information on, or ask a question about, NASA Earth Science data.
Post Reply
dogun
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 11:49 am America/New_York
Answers: 0

atmospheric correction quality control for Rrs

by dogun » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:18 pm America/New_York

Hello All,
I see some papers by NASA researchers suggesting 3X3, 5X5, 7X7 window size when validating atmospherically corrected images with in situ Rrs. If using validation data from e.g., AERONET-OC, and I have a lots of masked pixels in my 7 X 7 window, can I go above that - say, using  11 X 11 or more?

Filters:

OB.DAAC - SeanBailey
User Services
User Services
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2019 6:15 pm America/New_York
Answers: 1
Been thanked: 5 times

atmospheric correction quality control for Rrs

by OB.DAAC - SeanBailey » Sun Jan 22, 2017 11:40 am America/New_York

The size of the box should be sufficiently large to have statistical confidence in the retrieval, but small enough to ensure that the average measurement is representative of that seen by the in situ data.  If the waters are homogenous, you can use a larger region.  If there is a lot of local variability, using a larger region may degrade the validation results.  AERONET-OC sites tend to be coastal, and as such may have higher local variability.  Keep this in mind when interpreting the results.

Sean

dogun
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 11:49 am America/New_York
Answers: 0

atmospheric correction quality control for Rrs

by dogun » Fri Jan 27, 2017 8:51 pm America/New_York

Thanks so much Sean!

Post Reply