SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uludağ Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 22 Sayı: 1

A Comparison of Atmospheric Correction Methods on Hyperion Imagery in Forest Areas

HYPERION GÖRÜNTÜSÜ İLE ATMOSFERİK DÜZELTME YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI: ORMAN ALANI ÖRNEĞİ

Müfit Çetin(YALOVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Nebiye Musaoğlu
Osman Hilmi Koçal
Pages
103–114
Publication Date
2017-04-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results showed that EL and ATCOR methods achieved the best results for reducing some of the atmospheric effects, but FLAASH method resulted in strong anomalies in the corrected reflectance.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The reflectance values recorded by Earth observing satellite sensors can be different from the surface reflectance values measured on the ground due to interference of gases and water vapor in the atmosphere.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Therefore, atmospheric correction is a significant procedure to derive the true surface reflectance value during the processing of remotely sensed imagery especially with hyperspectral data.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results showed that EL and ATCOR methods achieved the best results for reducing some of the atmospheric effects, but FLAASH method resulted in strong anomalies in the corrected reflectance.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Uydu görüntüsü · Hiperspektral · Hyperion

Abstract

The reflectance values recorded by Earth observing satellite sensors can be different from the surface reflectance values measured on the ground due to interference of gases and water vapor in the atmosphere. Therefore, atmospheric correction is a significant procedure to derive the true surface reflectance value during the processing of remotely sensed imagery especially with hyperspectral data. In this context, this study attempts to analyze the quality of the surface reflectance derived from EO-1 Hyperion hyperspectral imagery using the atmospheric radiative transfer (RT) models (FLAASH and ATCOR) and empirical line (EL) method. In the study, ground-based reflectance measurements derived from ASD FieldSpec spectroradiometer are used as reference to evaluate the quality of the retrieved surface reflectance. The results showed that EL and ATCOR methods achieved the best results for reducing some of the atmospheric effects, but FLAASH method resulted in strong anomalies in the corrected reflectance.

Özet

Uzaktan algılama amaçlı algılayıcılar tarafından elde edilen yansıma değerleri atmosferik etkilerden dolayı hatalar içermektedir. Dolayısıyla, özellikle hiperspektral uydu görüntülerinin işlenmesinde ve analizinde doğru sonuçlar elde edilmesi için atmosferik düzeltme önemli bir işlemdir. Bu kapsamda, EO-1 Hyperion hiperspektral uydu görüntüsü kullanılarak atmosferik ışınımsal transfer modelleri (FLAASH, ATCOR) ve Doğrusal Ampirik (EL) yöntemi kullanılarak performans sonuçları sunulmuştur. Elde edilen düzeltilmiş verilerin kalite analizi ASD spektroradyometre aleti ile yapılan yer ölçmeleri kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada elde edilen sonuçlara göre EL ve ATCOR yöntemlerinin atmosferik etkinin giderilmesinde en iyi sonuçları verdiği, FLAASH yönteminin ise düzeltilmiş reflektans eğrilerinde güçlü sapmalara neden olduğu görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çetin, M., Musaoğlu, N., Koçal, O. H. (2017). A Comparison of Atmospheric Correction Methods on Hyperion Imagery in Forest Areas. Uludağ Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 1, 103–114. https://doi.org/10.17482/uumfd.308630

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (38)

  1. Adler-Golden, S.M., Matthew, M.W., Bernstein, L.S., Levine, R.Y., Berk, A., Richtsmeier, S.C., Acharya, P.K., Anderson, G.P., Felde, G., Gardner, J., Hike, M., Jeong, L.S., Pukall, B., Mello, J., Ratkowski, A. and Burke, H.H. (1999) Atmospheric correction for shortwave spectral imagery based on MODTRAN4, SPIE Proc. Imaging Spectrometry, 61-69. doi:10.1117/12.366315
  2. Cetin, M. and Musaoglu, N. (2008). Spectral calibration and atmospheric correction of Hyperion images, 2th Remote Sensing and GIS Symposium, Kayseri, Turkey, October, Proc. no:60. (In Turkish)
  3. Cetin, M. and Musaoglu, N. (2009) Merging hyperspectral and panchromatic image data: qualitative and quantitative analysis, Int. J. Remote Sens., 30(7), 1779–1804. doi:10.1080/01431160802639525
  4. Christian, B. and Krishnayya, N. S. R. (2007) Spectral signatures of teak (Tectona grandis L.) using hyperspectral (EO-1) data, Current Science, 93(9), 1291-1296.
  5. Clark, R.N., Swayze, G.A., Livo, K.E., Kokaly, R.F., Sutley, S.J., Dalton, J.B., McDougal, R.R. and Gent, C.A. (2003) Imaging spectroscopy: Earth and planetary remote sensing with the USGS Tetracorder and expert systems, Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(E12), 5.1-5.44. doi:10.1029/2002JE001847
  6. Cocks, T., Jenssen, R., Stewart, A., Wilson, I. and Shields, T. (1998) The hymap airborne hyperspectral sensor: The system, calibration and performance, Proc. of the First EARSeL Workshop on Imaging Spectroscopy, Zurich, Switzerland, 37–42.
  7. Dwyer, J.L., Kruse, F.A. and Lefkoff, A.B. (1995) Effects of empirical versus model based reflectance calibration on automated analysis of imaging spectrometer data: A case study from the Drum Mountains, Utah, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 61(10), 1247–1254.
  8. Felde, G.W., Anderson, G.P., Cooley, T.W., Matthew, M.W., Adler-Golden, S.M., Berk, A., and Lee, J. (2003) Analysis of Hyperion Data with the FLAASH Atmospheric Correction Algorithm, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 2003, 1, 90–92. doi: 10.1109/IGARSS.2003.1293688
  9. Farrand, W.H., Singer, R.B. and Merenyi, E. (1994) Retrieval of apparent surface reflectance from AVIRIS data: A comparison of empirical line, radiative transfer, and spectral mixture methods, Remote Sensing of Environment, 47(3), 311–321. doi: 10.1016/0034-4257(94)90099-X
  10. Gao, B.C., Heidebrecht, K.B. and Goetz, A.F.H. (1993) Derivation of scaled surface reflectances from AVIRIS data, Remote Sensing of Environment, 44(2-3), 165-178. doi:10.1016/0034-4257(93)90014-O
  11. Goetz, A., Ferri, M., Kindel, B., and Qu, Z. (2002) Atmospheric Correction of Hyperion Data and Techniques for Dynamic Scene Correction, Proc. International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 1408–1410. doi: 10.1109/IGARSS.2002.1026132
  12. Goetz, A.F.H., Kindel, B.C., Ferri M. and Qu, Z. (2003) HATCH: Results from simulated radiances, AVIRIS and HYPERION, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(6/1), 1215–1221. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2003.812905
  13. Goodenough, D.G., Dyk, A., Niemann, O., Pearlman, J.S., Chen, H., Han, T., Murdoch, M., and West, C. (2003) Processing HYPERION and ALI for Forest Classification, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing, 41(6/1), 1321-1331. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2003.813214
  14. Guanter, L., Richter, R. and Moreno, J. (2006) Spectral calibration of hyperspectral imagery using atmospheric absorption features, Applied Optics, 45(10), 2360–2370. doi: 10.1364/AO.45.002360
  15. Guanter, L., Estellés, V. and Moreno, J. (2007a) Spectral calibration and atmospheric correction of ultra-fine spectral and spatial resolution remote sensing data. Application to CASI-1500 data, Remote Sensing of Environment, 109(1), 54–65. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2006.12.005
  16. Guanter, L., Gonzalez-Sanpedro, M., Del, C. and Moreno, J. (2007b) A method for the atmospheric correction of ENVISAT/MERIS data over land targets, International Journal of Remote Sensing, 28(3-4), 709–728. doi: 10.1080/01431160600815525
  17. Hardin, P. and Hardin, A. (2013) Hyperspectral remote sensing of urban areas, Geography Compass, 7(1), 7-21. doi: 10.1111/gec3.12017
  18. Karpouzli, E. and Malthus, T. (2003) The empirical line method for the atmospheric correction of IKONOS imagery, International Journal of Remote Sensing, 24(5), 1143–1150.doi: 10.1080/0143116021000026779
  19. Kruse, F.A., Boardman, J.W. and Huntigton, J.F. (2003) Comparison of airborne hyperspectral data and EO-1 Hyperion for mineral mapping, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(6), 1388-1400. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2003.812908
  20. Lee, M., Huang, Y., Yao, H., Thomson, S.J. and Bruce, L. (2014) Determining the Effects of Storage on Cotton and Soybean Leaf Samples for Hyperspectral Analysis. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 7(6). doi:10.1109/JSTARS.2014.2330521
  21. Lu, D., Mausel, P., Brondízio, E., and Moran, E. (2002) Assessment of atmospheric correction methods for Landsat TM data applicable to Amazon basin LBA research, International Journal of Remote Sensing, 23(13), 2651–2671. doi: 10.1080/01431160110109642
  22. Mahiny, A.S. and Turner, B.J. (2007) A Comparison of Four Common Atmospheric Correction Methods, Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 73(4), 361-368. doi: 10.14358/PERS.73.4.361
  23. Matthew, M.W., Adler-Golden, S.M., Berk, A., Richtsmeier, S.C., Levine, R.Y., Bernstein, L.S., Acharya, P.K., Anderson, G.P., Felde, G.W., Hoke, M.P., Ratkowski, A., Burke, H.-H., Kaiser, R.D. and Miller, D.P. (2000) Status of Atmospheric Correction Using a MODTRAN4-based Algorithm, Proc. SPIE Algorithms for Multispectral, Hyperspectral and Ultraspectral Imagery VI, 199-207. doi:10.1117/12.410341
  24. Miller, C.J. (2002) Performance assessment of ACORN atmospheric correction algorithm, Proc. SPIE Algorithms and Technologies for Multispectral, Hyperspectral and Ultraspectral Imagery VIII, 438–449. doi: 10.1117/12.478777
  25. Norjamäki, I. and Tokola, T. (2007) Comparison of Atmospheric Correction Methods in Mapping Timber Volume with Multitemporal Landsat Images in Kainuu, Finland, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 73(2), 155-164. doi: 10.14358/PERS.73.2.155
  26. Pearlman, J.S., Barry, P.S., Segal, C.C., Shepanski, J., Beiso, D. and Carman, S.L. (2003) Hyperion, a Space-Based Imaging Spectrometer, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(6), 1160-1173. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2003.815018
  27. Perry, E.M., Warner, T. and Foote, P. (2000) Comparison of atmospheric modeling versus empirical line fitting for mosaicking HYDICE imagery, International Journal of Remote Sensing, 21(4), 799–803.doi:10.1080/014311600210588
  28. Qu, Z., Kindel, B.C. and Goetz, A.F.H. (2003) The high accuracy atmospheric correction for hyperspectral data (HATCH) model, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 41(6/1), 1223–1231. doi:10.1109/TGRS.2003.813125
  29. Richter, R. (1996) Atmospheric correction of satellite data with haze removal including a haze/clear transition region, Computers and Geosciences, 22(6), 675–681. doi:10.1016/0098-3004(96)00010-6
  30. San, B.T. and Suzen, M.L. (2010) Evaluation of different atmospheric correction algorithms for EO-1 Hyperion Imagery, ISPRS Technical Commision VII Symposium, Kyoto, JAPONYA, 38(8), 392-397.
  31. Schmid, T., Rodriguez-Rastrero, M., Escribano, P., Palacios-Orueta, A., Ben-Dor, E., Plaza, A., Milewski, R., Huesca, M., Bracken, A., Cicuendez, V., Pelayo, M., Chabrillat, S. (2016) Characterization of soil erosion indicators using hyperspectral data from a Mediterranean rainfed cultivated region, IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens., 9(2), 845-860. doi: 10.1109/JSTARS.2015.2462125
  32. Shang, S. and Chisholm, L.A. (2014) Classification of Australian native forest species using hyperspectral remote sensing and machine-learning classification algorithms, IEEE J. Sel. Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens., 7(6), 2481-2489. doi: 10.1109/JSTARS.2013.2282166
  33. Smith, G.M. and Milton, E.J. (1999) The use of the empirical line method to calibrate remotely sensed data to reflectance, International Journal of Remote Sensing, 20(13), 2653–2662. doi: 10.1080/014311699211994
  34. Veraguth, S., Keller, J., Schaepman, M. and Itten, K.I. (1995) Atmospheric correction of AVIRIS imagery in Central Switzerland. Sensitivity analysis regarding correction methods, radiation transfer models and atmospheric profiles, Proc. International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 2069-2071. doi:10.1109/IGARSS.1995.524110
  35. Wald, L. (2000) Quality of high resolution synthesised images: Is there a simple criterion?. Proceedings of the third conference "Fusion of Earth data: merging point measurements, raster maps and remotely sensed images", Sophia Antipolis, France, 99-103.
  36. Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C., Sheikh, H.R. and Simoncelli, E.P. (2004) Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity, IEEE Trans. Image Process., 13(4), 600-612. doi: 10.1109/TIP.2003.819861
  37. Wang, Z., Ziou, D., Armenakis, C., Li, D. and Li, Q. (2005) A comparative analysis of image fusion methods, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 43(6), 1391-1402. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2005.846874
  38. Xu, J.F. and Huang, J.F. (2008) Empirical Line Method Using Spectrally Stable Targets to Calibrate IKONOS Imagery, Pedosphere, 18(1), 124-130. doi:10.1016/S1002-0160(07)60110-6