Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30300357›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Penetration and scattering-Two optical phenomena to consider when applying proximal remote sensing technologies to object classifications.

Christian Nansen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Christian NansenDepartment of Entomology and Nematology, Davis, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1324-1949

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proximal remote sensing is being used across a very wide range of research fields and by scientists, who are often without deep theoretical knowledge optical physics; the author of this article falls squarely in that category! This article highlights two optical phenomena, which may greatly influence the quality and robustness of proximal remote sensing: penetration and scattering. Penetration implies that acquired reflectance signals are associated with both physical and chemical properties of target objects from both the surface and internal tissues/structures. Scattering implies that reflectance signals acquired from one point or object are influenced by scattered radiometric energy from neighboring points or objects. Based on a series of laboratory experiments, penetration and scattering were discussed in the context of "robustness" (repeatability) of hyperspectral reflectance data. High robustness implies that it is possible to control imaging conditions and therefore: 1) obtain very similar radiometric signals from inert objects (objects that do not change) over time, and 2) be able to consistently distinguish objects that are otherwise highly similar in appearance (size, shape, and color) and in terms of biochemical composition. It was demonstrated that robustness of hyperspectral reflectance data (40 spectral bands from 385 to 1024 nm) were significantly influenced by penetration and scattering of radiometric energy. In addition, it was demonstrated that the influence of penetration and scattering varied across the examined spectrum. Characterization of how optical phenomena may affect the robustness of reflectance data is important when using proximal remote sensing technologies as tools used to classify engineering and biological objects.

Indexed as

AedesAnimalsCandyImage Processing, Computer-AssistedOptical ImagingOvumPattern Recognition, AutomatedRadiometryRemote Sensing TechnologyReproducibility of ResultsScattering, RadiationSpectrum Analysis

Identifiers

PMID30300357
PMCPMC6177154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.