4.6 Article

Theoretical Accuracy of Along-Track Displacement Measurements from Multiple-Aperture Interferometry (MAI)

期刊

SENSORS
卷 14, 期 9, 页码 17703-17724

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s140917703

关键词

multiple-aperture interferometry (MAI); along-track displacement; synthetic aperture radar (SAR); SAR interferometry (InSAR)

资金

  1. Space Core Technology Development Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea - Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2012M1A3A3A02033465]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012M1A3A3A02033465] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The measurement of precise along-track displacements has been made with the multiple-aperture interferometry (MAI). The empirical accuracies of the MAI measurements are about 6.3 and 3.57 cm for ERS and ALOS data, respectively. However, the estimated empirical accuracies cannot be generalized to any interferometric pair because they largely depend on the processing parameters and coherence of the used SAR data. A theoretical formula is given to calculate an expected MAI measurement accuracy according to the system and processing parameters and interferometric coherence. In this paper, we have investigated the expected MAI measurement accuracy on the basis of the theoretical formula for the existing X-, C- and L-band satellite SAR systems. The similarity between the expected and empirical MAI measurement accuracies has been tested as well. The expected accuracies of about 2-3 cm and 3-4 cm (gamma = 0.8) are calculated for the X- and L-band SAR systems, respectively. For the C-band systems, the expected accuracy of Radarsat-2 ultra-fine is about 3-4 cm and that of Sentinel-1 IW is about 27 cm (gamma = 0.8). The results indicate that the expected MAI measurement accuracy of a given interferometric pair can be easily calculated by using the theoretical formula.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据