The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A simple error estimation method for linear-regression-based thermal sharpening techniques with the consideration of scale difference
Open accessAbstract
Thermal remote sensing imagery is helpful for land cover classification and related analysis. Unfortunately, the spatial resolution of thermal infrared (TIR) band is generally coarser than that of visual near-infrared band, which limits its more precise applications. Various thermal sharpening (TSP) techniques have been developed for improving the spatial resolution of the imagery of TIR band or land surface temperature (LST). However, there is no research on the theoretical estimation of TSP error till now, which implies that the error in sharpened LST imagery is unknown and the further analysis might be not reliable. In this paper, an error estimation method based on classical linear regression theory for the linear-regression-based TSP techniques was firstly introduced. However, the scale difference between the coarse resolution and fine resolution is not considered in this method. Therefore, we further developed an improved error estimation method with the consideration of the scale difference, which employs a novel term named equivalent random sample size to reflect the scale difference. A simulation study of modified TsHARP (a typical TSP technique) shows that the improved method estimated the TSP error more accurately than classical regression theory. Especially, the phenomena that TSP error increases with the increasing resolution gap between the initial and target resolutions can be successfully predicted by the proposed method.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The kernel-driven model's scale-invariant assumption may not always hold.
“the scale-invariant assumption may not always hold (Chen et al., 2014; Ghosh and Joshi, 2014; Jeganathan et al., 2011; Zhou et al., 2016)”
From PGDM: Physically guided diffusion model for land surface temperature downscaling (2025) · cites this paper as Chen et al., 2014
The Introduction (page unavailable) says that coarse-resolution training data and fine-resolution test data are sampled at different scales, so the scale effect cannot be neglected. This supports the general caution about assuming scale invariance, but the paper addresses linear-regression-based thermal sharpening, not the kernel-driven model named in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- 10.1016/j.rse.2005.04.026 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.03.008 · DOI
- 10.1080/0143116031000139917 · DOI
- 10.1109/TGRS.2010.2060342 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00036-1 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.rse.2006.10.006 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.rse.2011.03.008 · DOI · Paper page
- Yang G., 2011, Remote Sens. Environ., 115, 1202, 10.1016/j.rse.2011.01.004 · DOI
- Jing L.H., 2010, Int. J. Remote Sens., 31, 6459, 10.1080/01431160903439841 · DOI
- Gao F., 2012, Remote Sens., 4, 3287, 10.3390/rs4113287 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.rse.2012.12.014 · DOI · Paper page
- Chen X., 2012, IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett., 9, 549, 10.1109/LGRS.2011.2174453 · DOI
- Chen X., 2012, Application of Spatial Features to Classification, Segmentation, and Sharpening in Remotely Sensed Images
- Agam N., 2007, J. Geophys. Res., 112, 110
- Quan J., 2013, J. Remote Sens., 17, 361
- Anderson M.C., 2010, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., 7, 5957, 10.5194/hessd-7-5957-2010 · DOI
- Weisberg S., 1985, Applied Linear Regression
- AIST, 2007, Feature GEO Grid Innovation in Global Earth Observation, 26, 2
Cited by
Sorted by citations
PGDM: Physically guided diffusion model for land surface temperature downscaling
Zhang, H., Tang, B.-H., Hu, T., Jiang, Y., & Li, Z.-L. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.05964 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, X., Li, W., Chen, J., Zhan, W., & Rao, Y.
- Affiliations
- Beijing Normal University (CN)
- Nanjing University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Chen, Jin
- Venue
- Geo-spatial Information Science
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-01-02
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 54-59
- ISSN
- 1009-5020 (ISSN-L)
- 1993-5153
- OpenAlex
- W1986320227
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 1.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Geo-spatial Information Science (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (2013-RC-02)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Advanced Image Fusion Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Satellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
- Keywords
- error estimation, linear regression, scale differences, land surface temperature, thermal infrared imagery, spatial resolution enhancement, resolution gap
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