Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 852

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparative analysis of image fusion methods

Zhijun Wang, Ziou, D., Armenakis, C., Li, D., Qingquan Li·2005·IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing

Abstract

There are many image fusion methods that can be used to produce high-resolution multispectral images from a high-resolution panchromatic image and low-resolution multispectral images. Starting from the physical principle of image formation, this paper presents a comprehensive framework, the general image fusion (GIF) method, which makes it possible to categorize, compare, and evaluate the existing image fusion methods. Using the GIF method, it is shown that the pixel values of the high-resolution multispectral images are determined by the corresponding pixel values of the low-resolution panchromatic image, the approximation of the high-resolution panchromatic image at the low-resolution level. Many of the existing image fusion methods, including, but not limited to, intensity-hue-saturation, Brovey transform, principal component analysis, high-pass filtering, high-pass modulation, the a/spl grave/ trous algorithm-based wavelet transform, and multiresolution analysis-based intensity modulation (MRAIM), are evaluated and found to be particular cases of the GIF method. The performance of each image fusion method is theoretically analyzed based on how the corresponding low-resolution panchromatic image is computed and how the modulation coefficients are set. An experiment based on IKONOS images shows that there is consistency between the theoretical analysis and the experimental results and that the MRAIM method synthesizes the images closest to those the corresponding multisensors would observe at the high-resolution level.

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 · 10.1109/tgrs.2005.846874

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

See all 852

Metadata

Authors
Wang, Z., Ziou, D., Armenakis, C., Li, D., & Li, Q.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Published
2005-06
Volume
43
Issue
6
Pages
1391-1402
ISSN
0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2136401825
Cited by
852
References
24
FWCI
83.64
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

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 comparative analysis of image fusion methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tgrs.2005.846874
The paper
Wang, Z., Ziou, D., Armenakis, C., Li, D., & Li, Q. (2005). A comparative analysis of image fusion methods. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1109/tgrs.2005.846874

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.