Abstract
Water vapor plays an important role in climate change and water cycling, but there are few water vapor products with both high spatial resolution and high accuracy that effectively monitor the change of water vapor. The high precision Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Precipitable Water Vapor (PWV) is often used to calibrate the high spatial resolution Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) PWV to produce new PWV product with high accuracy and high spatial resolution. In addition, the machine learning method has a good performance in modifying the accuracy of MODIS PWV. However, the accuracy improvement of different machine learning methods and different modeling timescale is different. In this article, we use three machine learning methods, namely, the Random Forest (RF), Generalized Regression Neural Network (GRNN), and Back-propagation Neural Network (BPNN) to calibrate MODIS PWV in 2019, at annual and monthly timescales. We also use the Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) method for comparison. The root mean squares (RMSs) at the annual timescale with the three machine learning methods are 4.1 mm (BPNN), 3.3 mm (RF), and 3.9 mm (GRNN), and the average RMSs become 2.9 mm (BPNN), 2.8 mm (RF), and 2.5 mm (GRNN) at the monthly timescale. Those results are all better than the MLR method (5.0 mm at the annual timescale and 4.6 mm at the monthly timescale). When there is an obvious variation pattern in the training sample, the RF method can capture the pattern to achieve the best results since the RF achieves the best performance at the annual timescale. Dividing such samples into several sub-samples each having higher internal consistency could further improve the performance of machine learning methods, especially for the GRNN, since GRNN achieves the best performance at the monthly timescale, and the performance of those three machine learning methods at the monthly timescale is better than that of annual timescale. The spatial and temporal variation patterns of the RMS values are significantly weakened after the modeling by machine learning methods for both three methods.
Highlights
The training time of the Back-propagation Neural Network (BPNN) model is significantly increased compared with the Random Forest (RF) and Generalized Regression Neural Network (GRNN), and the BPNN training is prone to fall into the local optimum trap during the parameter fitting
Since the accuracy of the Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Precipitable Water Vapor (PWV) in China land region is poor compared to that in the U.S, we try to use different machine learning methods to modify the accuracy of MODIS PWV and evaluate the performance of different methods and modeling timescales
The GRNN, BPNN, and RF methods have been applied to the datasets in 2019 at annual and monthly timescale, and we use the Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) method for comparison
Summary
If the GNSS PWV is used as the target data in the machine learning, the final fusion products can achieve better accuracy. Used the GNSS PWV to calibrate the MODIS PWV by inverse distance weighting method and produce 1 km × 1 km PWV maps. Regression Neural Network (GRNN) to fuse the MODIS PWV and GNSS PWV at the annual scale in North America and the performance is better than the method in Zhang et al [4], but there is an obvious annual variation pattern in the PWV which might affect the fusion performance. The machine learning method could achieve better performance in modifying the accuracy of MODIS PWV, but different methods and different modeling scales could achieve different performance. The multiple linear regression (MLR) method is used for comparison
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have