Analyzing the effect of synthetic scene resolution, sampling interval, and signal-to-noise ratio on hyperspectral imaging sensor simulations

Tao Dongxing; Zhao Huijie; Jia Guorui; Yuan Yan

doi:10.1364/AO.53.006375

Applied Optics
Vol. 53,
Issue 28,
pp. 6375-6381
(2014)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.53.006375

Analyzing the effect of synthetic scene resolution, sampling interval, and signal-to-noise ratio on hyperspectral imaging sensor simulations

Tao Dongxing, Zhao Huijie, Jia Guorui, and Yuan Yan

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Tao Dongxing, Zhao Huijie, Jia Guorui, and Yuan Yan, "Analyzing the effect of synthetic scene resolution, sampling interval, and signal-to-noise ratio on hyperspectral imaging sensor simulations," Appl. Opt. 53, 6375-6381 (2014)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Abstract

Sensor simulation modeling is an important tool for the design of new earth imaging systems. As the input of the model, the characteristics of the synthetic spectral scene image data cube (SSSIDC) play an important role in the accuracy of the simulation. Based on a general sensor simulation model, the effects of SSSIDC resolution, sampling interval (SI), and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) on simulated data are analyzed. Analysis shows that the simulated data characteristics are a function of the model parameters and the SSSIDC characteristics. The results can be used for evaluating the errors of simulated data, giving criteria for scene image synthesis, and designing appropriate model parameters for expected simulation. Simulation experiments are included to demonstrate the discussed analysis, with the results showing that the analysis is valid.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Adaptive noise estimation from highly textured hyperspectral images

Peng Fu, Changyang Li, Yong Xia, Zexuan Ji, Quansen Sun, Weidong Cai, and David Dagan Feng
Appl. Opt. 53(30) 7059-7071 (2014)

Impact of signal-to-noise ratio in a hyperspectral sensor on the accuracy of biophysical parameter estimation in case II waters

Wesley J. Moses, Jeffrey H. Bowles, Robert L. Lucke, and Michael R. Corson
Opt. Express 20(4) 4309-4330 (2012)

Image sampling, reconstruction, and the effect of sample-scene phasing

Stephen K. Park and Robert A. Schowengerdt
Appl. Opt. 21(17) 3142-3151 (1982)

Previous Article Next Article

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (5)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (2)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Equations (23)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

$m$	$A$
0.5	0.1822
1.0	0.0076
1.5	0.0001
2.0	0.0000

Experiment 1: $ζ_{1} = 3 nm$
$Δ$ (nm)	$S R_{1}$	$S R_{2}$	MaxError
0.1	—	—	—
1.0	3.00	10.00	0.0003%
1.5	2.00	6.67	0.0003%
2.0	1.50	5.00	0.0027%
3.0	1.00	3.33	0.7670%
4.0	0.75	2.50	2.8690%
5.0	0.60	2.00	5.0760%
Experiment 2: $ζ_{1} = 6 nm$
0.1	—	—	—
2.0	3.00	5.00	0.0008%
3.0	2.00	3.33	0.0008%
4.0	1.50	2.50	0.0400%
6.0	1.00	1.67	1.2210%
8.0	0.75	1.25	9.2920%
10.0	0.60	1.00	10.441%
Experiment 3: $ζ_{1} = 10 nm$
0.1	—	—	—
3.3	3.00	3.00	0.0001%
5.0	2.00	2.00	0.0009%
6.7	1.50	1.50	0.7860%
10.0	1.00	1.00	5.0480%
13.3	0.75	0.75	17.8590%
16.7	0.60	0.60	9.7950%

$m$	$A$
0.5	0.1822
1.0	0.0076
1.5	0.0001
2.0	0.0000

Experiment 1: $ζ_{1} = 3 nm$
$Δ$ (nm)	$S R_{1}$	$S R_{2}$	MaxError
0.1	—	—	—
1.0	3.00	10.00	0.0003%
1.5	2.00	6.67	0.0003%
2.0	1.50	5.00	0.0027%
3.0	1.00	3.33	0.7670%
4.0	0.75	2.50	2.8690%
5.0	0.60	2.00	5.0760%
Experiment 2: $ζ_{1} = 6 nm$
0.1	—	—	—
2.0	3.00	5.00	0.0008%
3.0	2.00	3.33	0.0008%
4.0	1.50	2.50	0.0400%
6.0	1.00	1.67	1.2210%
8.0	0.75	1.25	9.2920%
10.0	0.60	1.00	10.441%
Experiment 3: $ζ_{1} = 10 nm$
0.1	—	—	—
3.3	3.00	3.00	0.0001%
5.0	2.00	2.00	0.0009%
6.7	1.50	1.50	0.7860%
10.0	1.00	1.00	5.0480%
13.3	0.75	0.75	17.8590%
16.7	0.60	0.60	9.7950%

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (5)

Tables (2)

Equations (23)

Applied Optics