Cited by 11Advanced Image Fusion TechniquesSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryRemote-Sensing Image Classification

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 access
Chen, Xuehong, Li, Wentao, Chen, Jin, Zhan, Wenfeng, Rao, Yuhan·2014·Geo-spatial Information Science

Abstract

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10095020.2014.889546

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

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

  1. 10.1016/j.rse.2005.04.026 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.03.008 · DOI
  3. 10.1080/0143116031000139917 · DOI
  4. 10.1109/TGRS.2010.2060342 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/S0034-4257(03)00036-1 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.rse.2006.10.006 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.rse.2011.03.008 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Yang G., 2011, Remote Sens. Environ., 115, 1202, 10.1016/j.rse.2011.01.004 · DOI
  9. Jing L.H., 2010, Int. J. Remote Sens., 31, 6459, 10.1080/01431160903439841 · DOI
  10. Gao F., 2012, Remote Sens., 4, 3287, 10.3390/rs4113287 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.rse.2012.12.014 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Chen X., 2012, IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett., 9, 549, 10.1109/LGRS.2011.2174453 · DOI
  13. Chen X., 2012, Application of Spatial Features to Classification, Segmentation, and Sharpening in Remotely Sensed Images
  14. Agam N., 2007, J. Geophys. Res., 112, 110
  15. Quan J., 2013, J. Remote Sens., 17, 361
  16. Anderson M.C., 2010, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., 7, 5957, 10.5194/hessd-7-5957-2010 · DOI
  17. Weisberg S., 1985, Applied Linear Regression
  18. AIST, 2007, Feature GEO Grid Innovation in Global Earth Observation, 26, 2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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
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
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