Estimation of Soil Moisture in Vegetation-Covered Floodplains with Sentinel-1 SAR Data Using Support Vector Regression

被引:0
作者
Ann-Kathrin Holtgrave
Michael Förster
Felix Greifeneder
Claudia Notarnicola
Birgit Kleinschmit
机构
[1] Technical University of Berlin,Geoinformation in Environmental Planning Laboratory
[2] Eurac Research,Institute for Applied Remote Sensing
来源
PFG – Journal of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Geoinformation Science | 2018年 / 86卷
关键词
Soil moisture; SVR; SAR; Sentinel-1; Floodplains; Vegetation;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Soil moisture (SM) is a significant parameter influencing various environmental processes in hydrology, ecology, and climatology. SAR-derived remote sensing products can be valuable input features for estimating SM. In the past, the results often lacked a sufficient spatial resolution for a local application. With the new Sentinel-1 sensor it seems possible to derive more detailed SM-maps. Therefore, we utilized this sensor to test the applicability of a support vector regression (SVR) based method for SM retrieval for two different grassland-covered floodplains in north-east Germany. The model was then tested for its transferability. Moreover, it was operating exclusively with free and publicly available data. In situ data of volumetric SM were collected in 2015 for both study areas at the Elbe and Peene rivers. Remote sensing input data were VV and VH backscatter, and local incidence angle derived from Sentinel-1 images, as well as height, slope, and aspect derived from SRTM images. Additionally, the Landsat 8 NDVI product was included to compensate vegetation influences on SAR backscatter. Overall, the SVR is capable of estimating SM reasonably accurate (RMSE 9.7 and 13.8 Vol% for the individual study sites). Nevertheless, the performance highly depends on the in situ data—particularly, on the amount of samples (here 98 Peene and 71 Elbe) and the value range (10–100 Vol% Peene and 12–87 Vol% Elbe). Furthermore, the optimal input feature combination and the best performance differed between study sites. In summary, backscatter, elevation, and NDVI were the most important features for SM prediction. Models using only Radar-derived features where only 1.05 or 2.01 Vol% worse than models including optical data and are, therefore, able to estimate SM. Combining samples from both study sites slightly impaired the model. Due to varying site-conditions in terms of humidity and vegetation cover, the transferability of the SVR models is not possible for the studied sites.
引用
收藏
页码:85 / 101
页数:16
相关论文
共 357 条
[1]  
Aguilar FJ(2008)Accuracy assessment of lidar-derived digital elevation models Photogram Rec 23 148-169
[2]  
Mills JP(2010)Estimating soil moisture using remote sensing data: a machine learning approach Adv Water Resour 33 69-80
[3]  
Ahmad S(2006)Multi-time scale stream flow predictions: the support vector machines approach J Hydrol 318 7-16
[4]  
Kalra A(2002)Retrieving surface roughness and soil moisture from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data using neural networks Can J Remote Sens 28 701-711
[5]  
Stephen H(2007)Operational performance of current synthetic aperture radar sensors in mapping soil surface characteristics in agricultural environments: application to hydrological and erosion modelling Hydrol Processes 22 9-20
[6]  
Asefa T(2012)Estimation of soil parameters over bare agriculture areas from C-band polarimetric SAR data using neural networks Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 16 1607-1621
[7]  
Kemblowski M(2009)Soil moisture retrieval from active spaceborne microwave observations: an evaluation of current techniques Remote Sens 1 210-50
[8]  
McKee M(2001)Organizational research: determining appropriate sample size in survey research Inf Technol Learn Perform J 19 43-137
[9]  
Khalil A(2001)Parameterization of vegetation backscatter in radar-based, soil moisture estimation Remote Sens Environ 76 130-8
[10]  
Baghdadi N(2016)TERENO: German network of terrestrial environmental observatories J Large Scale Res Facil 2 1-373