Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 289

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Review article Synergy in remote sensing-what's in a pixel?

Cracknell, A. P.·1998·International Journal of Remote Sensing

Abstract

We address various questions that arise from the fact that a pixel or the related instantaneous field-of-view (IFOV) on the ground is often larger than we would like it to be.The problems arise as a penalty imposed by technology for the fact that a spacecraft gives an overview of a very large area. We study the question of why the pixel size is important when one studies satellite imagery and also some questions related to the factors that contribute to the recorded signal in a remotely-sensed data set. This includes a discussion of the instantaneous field-of-view, both from the simple geometrical point of view and from a more physical point of view. It also involves a study of the point spread function and some discussion of the problems associated with the determination of the point spread function of a given scanner. The questions of the calibration of the detectors in an instrument and of the intercalibration of nominally identical members of a series of instruments are also considered. The integration of remotely-sensed data into a GIS almost inevitably involves resampling and this leads to further complications in understanding the origin of the signal (digital number, DN) associated with a given pixel. The effects of different methods of interpolation are considered as well as the consequences of resampling in relation to the classification of an image. Several other topics are also considered and these include (a) the achievement of geometrical rectification with an error substantially smaller than (e.g., only 20 per cent of) the length of the edge of the instantaneous field-of-view, (b) data compression or upscaling, (c) mixed pixels, and (d) the study of sub-IFOV size objects. The general conclusion is that it is important to realise that what contributes to producing the digital number on a computer tape or in a disk file of an image is not a simple thing. There is no simple answer to the question 'what exactly gives rise to the signal detected and recorded in a pixel in a remotely-sensed image?' The main point to be made is to try to ensure that it is realised that there is a problem and to give some indication of the nature of that problem.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/014311698214848

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Metadata

Authors
Cracknell, A. P.
Venue
International Journal of Remote Sensing
Published
1998-01
Volume
19
Issue
11
Pages
2025-2047
ISSN
  • 0143-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-5901
OpenAlex
W2032046865
Cited by
289
References
0
FWCI
13.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.