Impact of Preprocessing on Tree Canopy Cover Modelling: Does Gap-Filling of Landsat Time Series Improve Modelling Accuracy?

Abstract

Preprocessing of Landsat images is a double-edged sword, transforming the raw data into a useful format but potentially introducing unwanted values with unnecessary steps. Through recovering missing data of satellite images in time series analysis, gap-filling is an important, highly developed, preprocessing procedure, but its necessity and effects in numerous Landsat applications, such as tree canopy cover (TCC) modelling, are rarely examined. We address this barrier by providing a quantitative comparison of TCC modelling using predictor variables derived from Landsat time series that included gap-filling versus those that did not include gap-filling and evaluating the effects that gap-filling has on modelling TCC. With 1-year Landsat time series from a tropical region located in Taita Hills, Kenya, and a reference TCC map in 0–100 scales derived from airborne laser scanning data, we designed comparable random forest modelling experiments to address the following questions: 1) Does gap-filling improve TCC modelling based on time series predictor variables including the seasonal composites (SC), spectral-temporal metrics (STMs), and harmonic regression (HR) coefficients? 2) What is the difference in TCC modelling between using gap-filled pixels and using valid (actual or cloud-free) pixels? Two gap-filling methods, one temporal-based method (Steffen spline interpolation) and one hybrid method (MOPSTM) have been examined. We show that gap-filled predictors derived from the Landsat time series delivered better performance on average than non-gap-filled predictors with the average of median RMSE values for Steffen-filled and MOPSTM-filled SC’s being 17.09 and 16.57 respectively, while for non-gap-filled predictors, it was 17.21. MOPSTM-filled SC is 3.7% better than non-gap-filled SC on RMSE, and Steffen-filled SC is 0.7% better than non-gap-filled SC on RMSE. The positive effects of gap-filling may be reduced when there are sufficient high-quality valid observations to generate a seasonal composite. The single-date experiment suggests that gap-filled data (e.g. RMSE of 16.99, 17.71, 16.24, and 17.85 with 100% gap-filled pixels as training and test datasets for four seasons) may deliver no worse performance than valid data (e.g. RMSE of 15.46, 17.07, 16.31, and 18.14 with 100% valid pixels as training and test datasets for four seasons). Thus, we conclude that gap-filling has a positive effect on the accuracy of TCC modelling, which justifies its inclusion in image preprocessing workflows.