Show simple item record

contributor authorChen, Fan
contributor authorCrow, Wade T.
contributor authorCosh, Michael H.
contributor authorColliander, Andreas
contributor authorAsanuma, Jun
contributor authorBerg, Aaron
contributor authorBosch, David D.
contributor authorCaldwell, Todd G.
contributor authorCollins, Chandra Holifield
contributor authorJensen, Karsten Høgh
contributor authorMartínez-Fernández, Jose
contributor authorMcNairn, Heather
contributor authorStarks, Patrick J.
contributor authorSu, Zhongbo
date accessioned2019-10-05T06:56:32Z
date available2019-10-05T06:56:32Z
date copyright6/13/2019 12:00:00 AM
date issued2019
identifier otherJHM-D-19-0049.1.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4263902
description abstractAbstractDespite extensive efforts to maximize ground coverage and improve upscaling functions within core validation sites (CVS) of the NASA Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) mission, spatial averages of point-scale soil moisture observations often fail to accurately capture the true average of the reference pixels. Therefore, some level of pixel-scale sampling error from in situ observations must be considered during the validation of SMAP soil moisture retrievals. Here, uncertainties in the SMAP core site average soil moisture (CSASM) due to spatial sampling errors are examined and their impact on CSASM-based SMAP calibration and validation metrics is discussed. The estimated uncertainty (due to spatial sampling limitations) of mean CSASM over time is found to be large, translating into relatively large sampling uncertainty levels for SMAP retrieval bias when calculated against CSASM. As a result, CSASM-based SMAP bias estimates are statistically insignificant at nearly all SMAP CVS. In addition, observations from temporary networks suggest that these (already large) bias uncertainties may be underestimated due to undersampled spatial variability. The unbiased root-mean-square error (ubRMSE) of CSASM is estimated via two approaches: classical sampling theory and triple collocation, both of which suggest that CSASM ubRMSE is generally within the range of 0.01?0.02 m3 m?3. Although limitations in both methods likely lead to underestimation of ubRMSE, the results suggest that CSASM captures the temporal dynamics of the footprint-scale soil moisture relatively well and is thus a reliable reference for SMAP ubRMSE calculations. Therefore, spatial sampling errors are revealed to have very different impacts on efforts to estimate SMAP bias and ubRMSE metrics using CVS data.
publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
titleUncertainty of Reference Pixel Soil Moisture Averages Sampled at SMAP Core Validation Sites
typeJournal Paper
journal volume20
journal issue8
journal titleJournal of Hydrometeorology
identifier doi10.1175/JHM-D-19-0049.1
journal fristpage1553
journal lastpage1569
treeJournal of Hydrometeorology:;2019:;volume 020:;issue 008
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record