The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A test of the Hapke photometric model
Open accessAbstract
We conducted a test of the Hapke (1981, 1984, 1986, 2002) photometric model to determine what physical parameters could be confidently linked to a surface's photometric behavior. The first author selected and measured the bidirectional reflectance distribution functions of 14 different samples in up to three different wavelengths using the Bloomsburg University Goniometer Laboratory. A total of 29 data files were obtained, each file containing more than 700 measurements from different viewing geometries; phase angles varied from 3° to 130°. The 29 files were initially sent “in‐the‐blind” to the second author, who was charged with inverting the data files and extracting best fit model parameters. Our baseline model used the most recent Hapke (2002) formulation with a two‐term Henyey‐Greenstein particle phase function and shadow‐hiding backscatter opposition effect (SHOE) model. We also inverted the data with three other variations that included three‐term Henyey‐Greenstein phase functions and both SHOE and the coherent backscatter opposition effect (CBOE) models. Our results were compared with the known physical properties of our samples. We found no compelling evidence that individual photometric parameters could be uniquely interpreted to reveal the physical state of our samples, either in an absolute or relative sense. Rather, combinations of physical properties such as albedo, roughness, and porosity were convolved within each retrieved photometric parameter. On the basis of our empirical evidence, we speculate that the fault lies with the inability of radiative transfer models to adequately account for discrete media and the effects of porosity, and its deficient assumption that individual particles are the primary scattering units.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A Review of Nonlinear Hyperspectral Unmixing Methods
Heylen, R., Parente, M., & Gader, P. (2014) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/jstars.2014.2320576 · Cited by 591
Bidirectional reflectance spectroscopy
Hapke, B. (2008) · Icarus · doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2008.01.003 · Cited by 284
Resolved Hapke parameter maps of the Moon
Sato, H., Robinson, M. S., Hapke, B., Denevi, B. W., & Boyd, A. K. (2014) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets · doi:10.1002/2013je004580 · Cited by 165
Metadata
- Authors
- Shepard, M. K., & Helfenstein, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 112
- Issue
- E3
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2090655794
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A test of the Hapke photometric model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2005je002625
- The paper
- Shepard, M. K., & Helfenstein, P. (2007). A test of the Hapke photometric model. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005je002625
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.