Next Article in Journal
Assessing Obukhov Length and Friction Velocity from Floating Lidar Observations: A Data Screening and Sensitivity Computation Approach
Previous Article in Journal
Analysis of Precise Orbit Determination for the HY2D Satellite Using Onboard GPS/BDS Observations
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

A TIR-Visible Automatic Registration and Geometric Correction Method for SDGSAT-1 Thermal Infrared Image Based on Modified RIFT

Remote Sens. 2022, 14(6), 1393; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14061393
by Jinfen Chen 1,2,3, Bo Cheng 1,2,3,*, Xiaoping Zhang 1,3, Tengfei Long 1, Bo Chen 1, Guizhou Wang 1 and Degang Zhang 1,3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(6), 1393; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14061393
Submission received: 27 January 2022 / Revised: 9 March 2022 / Accepted: 11 March 2022 / Published: 14 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Earth Observation Data)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

The co-authors and I would like to thank you for the time and effort spending in reviwing the manuscript. We have accepted your comments and made detailed modifications in the manuscript according to your comments and suggestions.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The submitted paper proposes a new and interesting approach (modified RFIT) for the registration of TIR-visible satellite images. Results of different experiments are validated against other algorithms. In general, the paper is well written. However, prior to publication some issues have to be addressed:

- The abstract and introduction are too long with respect to the result part and should be shortened.

- The discussion with respect to the comparison of the modified RITF and other algorithms is too narrow and too short. The performance of the proposed method is quite impressive considering the presented experiments. The authors should discuss and explain in more detail the shortcomes of the other methods (explain why they perform worse). Furthermore, possible shortcomes of the proposed algorithm should be discussed (what kind of images might impose issues for the proposed method).

Specific comments:

- Equation (16) is not correct. The squares under the root are missing.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

The co-authors and I would like to thank you for the time and effort spending in reviwing the manuscript. We have accepted your comments and made detailed modifications in the manuscript according to your comments and suggestions.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

All my concerns have been solved.

Back to TopTop