## Multi sky-view 3D aerosol distribution recovery |

Optics Express, Vol. 21, Issue 22, pp. 25820-25833 (2013)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.21.025820

Acrobat PDF (5854 KB)

### Abstract

Aerosols affect climate, health and aviation. Currently, their retrieval assumes a plane-parallel atmosphere and solely vertical radiative transfer. We propose a principle to estimate the aerosol distribution as it really is: a three dimensional (3D) volume. The principle is a type of tomography. The process involves wide angle integral imaging of the sky on a very large scale. The imaging can use an array of cameras in visible light. We formulate an image formation model based on 3D radiative transfer. Model inversion is done using optimization methods, exploiting a closed-form gradient which we derive for the model-fit cost function. The tomography model is distinct, as the radiation source is unidirectional and uncontrolled, while off-axis scattering dominates the images.

© 2013 OSA

## 1. Introduction

3. M. Levoy, R. Ng, A. Adams, M. Footer, and M. Horowitz, “Light field microscopy,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) **25**, 924–934 (2006). [CrossRef]

4. U. Dayan, B. Ziv, T. Shoob, and Y. Enzel, “Suspended dust over southeastern Mediterranean and its relation to atmospheric circulations,” International Journal of Climatology **924**, 915–924 (2008). [CrossRef]

5. O. V. Kalashnikova, M. J. Garay, A. B. Davis, D. J. Diner, and J. V. Martonchik, “Sensitivity of multi-angle photo-polarimetry to vertical layering and mixing of absorbing aerosols: Quantifying measurement uncertainties,” Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer **112**, 2149–2163 (2011). [CrossRef]

9. A. Bluestone, G. Abdoulaev, C. Schmitz, R. Barbour, and A. Hielscher, “Three-dimensional optical tomography of hemodynamics in the human head,” Opt. Express **9**, 272–86 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11. D. A. Boas, D. H. Brooks, E. L. Miller, C. A. DiMarzio, M. Kilmer, R. J. Gaudette, and Q. Zhang, “Imaging the body with diffuse optical tomography,” Sig.Proc. Magazine **18**, 57–75 (2001). [CrossRef]

12. H. Messer, A. Zinevich, and P. Alpert, “Environmental sensor networks using existing wireless communication systems for rainfall and wind velocity measurements,” IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine **15**, 32–38 (2012). [CrossRef]

13. J. Gregson, M. Krimerman, M. B. Hullin, and W. Heidrich, “Stochastic tomography and its applications in 3D imaging of
mixing fluids,” ACM Trans. Graph. **31**, **52**:1–52
(2012). [CrossRef]

14. B. R. Cosofret, D. Konno, A. Faghfouri, H. S. Kindle, C. M. Gittins, M. L. Finson, T. E. Janov, M. J. Levreault, R. K. Miyashiro, and W. J. Marinelli, “Imaging sensor constellation for tomographic chemical cloud mapping,” Appl. Opt. **48**, 1837–52 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

*scattering*, rather than absorption. Since the radiation source is single and fixed in space and time, we cannot rely on direct illumination for tomographic recovery of attenuation fields [15]. We may only use sunlight scattered into the LOS. The model is

*nonlinear*, yet

*tractable*. We model passive optical tomographic imaging of 3D atmospheric scatterer distributions in cloudless conditions. Then, we solve this tomography problem, to recover the distribution. Recovery is formulated as an optimization that minimizes a cost function. We derive the gradient of this cost function, to enable efficient optimization.

## 2. Theoretical background

**Extinction**: Sun rays (SR) irradiate a small volume that includes particles of a certain type. Each particle has an

*extinction cross section*for interacting with the irradiance. An aerosol extinction cross section is denoted

*σ*

^{aerosol}. The aerosol density is

*n*. Per unit volume, the

*extinction coefficient*due to aerosols is

*β*

^{aerosol}=

*σ*

^{aerosol}

*n*. In addition, the atmosphere contains air molecules. The extinction coefficient due to the molecules is

*β*

^{air}. The volume has infinitesimal length

*dl*. Then, the relative portion of extinct SR irradiance is the unitless differential optical depth,

*dτ*= (

*β*

^{aerosol}+

*β*

^{air})

*dl*. The

*optical depth*aggregates in extended propagation: where

*τ*

^{air}= ∫

*β*

^{air}

*dl*. Through an attenuating atmosphere, the

*transmittance*exponentially decays with the optical depth:

**Scattering**: Interaction of a single particle with the irradiance is by absorption and scattering. The weight of scattering (to all directions), relative to the total extinction is given by the unitless

*single scattering albedo*of the particle. For an aerosol, the single scattering albedo is denoted

*ϖ*

^{aerosol}. The

*scattering coefficient*due to aerosols in the volume is The angular distribution of scattering by an aerosol is determined by a

*phase function P*

^{aerosol}, which is normalized: its integral over all solid angles is unit. Part of the light scatters towards a camera’s LOS, as illustrated in Fig. 1. The angle between the SR and LOS is the scattering angle Φ

^{scatter}. The

*angular scattering coefficient*due to aerosols is The phase function is often approximated by a parametric expression. Specifically, the Henyey-Greenstein [16

16. W. M. Cornette and J. G. Shanks, “Physically reasonable analytic expression for the single-scattering phase function,” Appl. Opt. **31**, 3152–3160 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

*anisotropy parameter g*:

*Rayleigh*model. The phase function is and the single scattering albedo in visible light is

*ϖ*

^{air}=1. Air molecular density falls off approximately exponentially with altitude

*h*, with a characteristic [17] falloff height

*H*

^{air}= 8 km. Thus, the coefficients for extinction and scattering by air molecules can be modeled by [17], where

*λ*is the wavelength, in microns.

**Inverse transform sampling**: A tool for RT modeling is the Monte-Carlo (MC) method. MC considers scattering and extinction as random phenomena, that are sampled from their probability distributions. Inverse transform sampling [18

18. L. Devroye, “Sample-based non-uniform random variate generation,” in Proceedings of the 18th conference on Winter simulation , (ACM, 1986), pp. 260–265. [CrossRef]

*u*be a random number drawn from a uniform distribution in the interval [0, 1]. The number

*u*can be transformed into a random variable

*X*, whose cumulative distribution function (CDF) is

*F*(

*X*). The transform is

*X*=

*F*

^{−1}(

*u*), where

*F*

^{−1}denotes the inverse function of

*F*.

*t*is high, and the probability diminishes as

*t*→ 0. Thus (Eq. (2)) can be viewed as a probability density function, whose CDF is Thus a photon propagates to a random optical depth If the atmosphere is uniform, then from Eq. (1) the photon reaches a random distance before interacting with a particle. If the number of photons launched is very high, their average number falls off in consistency with Eqs. (1) and (2). Analogous transforms generate scattering at random angles, according to the phase function.

## 3. 3D recovery approach and its assessment

*integral imaging*[19

19. S.-H. Hong, J.-S. Jang, and B. Javidi, “Three-dimensional volumetric object reconstruction using computational integral imaging,” Opt. Express **12**, 483–491 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

**Θ**. Any camera

*c*is at a distinct fixed location, capturing raw image

*i*(

_{c}**Θ**). This paper reports a first step: formulating a principle for estimating 3D atmospheric aerosols distributions, using such data. To theoretically study the feasibility and cross validate it, we perform RT using two different forward models. A forward model takes as input a 3D aerosol distribution, and outputs images as if captured at various viewpoints. One model uses MC (Sec. 6): it is stochastic, slow but naturally expresses multiple-scattering. Hence, MC rigorously simulates realistic scenes of arbitrary complexity. The second model uses the single-scattering approximation (Sec. 4). It is less accurate than MC, but solves RT in an analytic, closed form. This form enables simple inversion of the model, to estimate the underlying aerosol distribution (Sec. 7).

## 4. Single-scattering forward model

*N*

_{voxels}rectangular cuboid volume elements (voxels), indexed by

*k*,

*m*or

*q*. In a

*single-scattering*model, any SR changes direction only once on the way to a camera. This model is valid in atmospheres that are not very dense (inside fog and clouds this model does not apply). Here, RT has three steps (Fig. 1): (

`i`) Attenuation of a SR propagating from the top of the atmosphere (TOA) to voxel

*k*. (

`ii`) Light scattering at voxel

*k*, towards a camera. (

`iii`) Light attenuation on the LOS from voxel

*k*to the camera. Steps

`i`,

`iii`involve the optical depth along the light path to and from voxel

*k*(analyzed in Sec. 4.1). Step

`ii`involves the scattering coefficient at voxel

*k*(Sec. 4.2).

### 4.1. Optical depth

*k*by [SR,

*k*] (See Fig. 1). This SR intersects voxel

*q*. The intersection line segment has geometric length

*l*

_{SR}(

*q*|Δ

*z*, Φ

^{SR},

*k*), where Δ

*z*is a voxel’s vertical geometric thickness, and Φ

^{SR}is the Sun angle. Define a

*N*

_{voxels}×

*N*

_{voxels}matrix

*D*^{Sun→voxel}, whose element (

*k*,

*q*) represents

*l*

_{SR}(

*q*): Matrix

*D*^{Sun→voxel}is sparse. Analogously, for camera

*c*, denote by [LOS

*,*

_{c}*k*] a LOS bounded between the camera and the center of voxel

*k*(see Fig. 1). The LOS zenith angle is

*q*. The geometric length of this intersection line segment is

*l*

_{LOSc}(

*m*|Δ

*z*,

*k*). As in Eq. (11), define a

*N*

_{voxels}×

*N*

_{voxels}sparse matrix whose element (

*k*,

*m*) is

*σ*

^{aerosol},

*ϖ*

^{aerosol},

*g*] is uniform across the scene, but the density distribution

*n*(

*k*) is variable. As a numerical approximation, assume that within any voxel, the molecular parameters {

*β*

^{air}(

*k*),

*α*

^{air}(

*k*)} and the aerosol density

*n*(

*k*) are constants, e.g., corresponding to the value at each voxel center. Following Eq. (1), the optical depths between the TOA and voxel

*k*, and from voxel

*k*to camera

*c*are Let

**,**

*n*

*τ*_{SR}and

*β*^{air}be column stack vector representations of

*n*(

*k*),

*τ*

_{SR}(

*k*) and

*β*

^{air}(

*k*), respectively. Then, we can write Eq. (13) using matrix notation:

*c*. Hence, in matrix notation, Eq. (1) yields the total optical depths corresponding to LOSs (of camera

*c*) and SRs that cross all voxels: where

### 4.2. Scattering

*c*and voxel

*k*, the lines [SR,

*k*] and [LOS

*,*

_{c}*k*] intersect at a fixed angle

*c*. Using Eqs. (4) and (6), the angular scattering coefficients across the domain are expressed in vector form by Here the operator ⊙ denotes the Hadamard (element-wise) product.

### 4.3. Image capture

*k*] and [LOS

*,*

_{c}*k*], and scattering by voxel

*k*towards the camera (Eqs. (2), (4) and (15)) the voxel contributes radiant power where

*L*

^{TOA}is the radiance at the TOA. A column-stack vector of all voxel contributions is

*N*

_{pix}pixels. Each pixel collects light from a narrow cone in the atmosphere. The cone contains or intersects some voxels, while being oblivious to all the rest. Overall, light power captured at the pixel is a weighted sum of the power

*p*(

_{c}*k*) radiating from all voxels. This sum is formulated by a matrix operation

**Π**

*over*

_{c}

*p**: where*

_{c}

*i**is the image, column-stacked to a vector*

_{c}*N*

_{pix}long. Combining Eqs. (15), (16), (18) and (19), the captured image is thus

## 5. Examples

**Geometry**: The sun is at zenith angle Φ

^{SR}= 45°. Its

*L*

^{TOA}is obtained from [20

20. M. Charity, “Blackbody color datafile,” (2001), http://www.vendian.org/mncharity/dir3/blackbody/UnstableURLs/bbr\_color.html.

21. Wikipedia, “Sunlight — Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,” (2012), http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sunlight\&oldid=502554571.

**Aerosol**: We used particle-type 6 from the aerosol list in [22

22. J. V. Martonchik, R. A. Kahn, and D. J. Diner, “Retrieval of aerosol properties over land using MISR observations,” in *Satellite Aerosol Remote Sensing over Land*,, A. A. Kokhanovsky and G. Leeuw, eds. (Springer BerlinHeidelberg, 2009), pp. 267–293. [CrossRef]

*g*

_{R},

*g*

_{G},

*g*

_{B}] = [0.763, 0.775, 0.786]. Its corresponding extinction cross sections are

*ϖ*

^{aerosol}= 1. We simulated spatial distributions using a product of two functions. To express the general trend of reduced density with altitude

*h*(

*k*) of voxel

*k*, we follow [17] and set the first function as where

*H*

^{aerosol}= 2 km. To express a clustered nature of aerosol distributions (as clouds), we define blobs in the form of 3D ellipsoids. There may be multiple ellipsoids suspended. Then The true aerosol distribution is then

*n*^{true}=

*𝒮*{

*f*_{1}⊙

*f*_{2}}, where

*𝒮*is 3D spatial smoothing, obtained by narrow 3D Gaussian filtering. It expresses non-sharp boundaries of typical distributions. The

*Haze Blobs*scene in Fig. 2(a) uses two ellipsoids: one is 32km wide, 2.8km thick and centered at altitude 2.5km; the other is 24km wide, 2.1km thick and centered at altitude 5km. Horizontal widths are much larger than the vertical thickness, in consistency with atmospheric scales. Figure 3 shows photographs of the

*Haze Blobs*scene, as simulated by Eq. (20). For clarity of display, the brightness of the displayed pictures in this paper underwent the same standard contrast enhancement (stretching), including gamma-correction. The recovery algorithm, of course, uses the raw (not brightness enhanced) images.

*Haze Front*scene in Fig. 2(b) uses an ellipsoid degenerated to an elliptic cylinder that partly enters the analyzed volume. It is 32km long (only part of which enters the volume), 4km thick and centered at altitude 5km. The front stretches across the domain width.

## 6. Multiple-scattering forward model by Monte Carlo

- Launch a photon-packet from camera
*c*to direction**Θ**. This is the initial*ray*, denoted*ℛ*_{0}. The packet has intensity*I*_{0}.Per iteration*i*: - Find the distance on ray
*ℛ*to which the photon-packet propagates. To do this, Eq. (9) yields_{i}*τ*^{random}. Then, Eq. (10) generalizes to a non-uniform atmosphere: using Eq. (1), numerically seek*l*^{random}s.t. Distance*l*^{random}along*ℛ*yields 3D position_{i}**X**. If_{i}**X**is outside the atmospheric grid, the packet is terminated. If, in addition,_{i}*ℛ*|| SR, the packet is counted as contributing to the image pixel._{i} - The type of particle (air molecule or aerosol) that the photon-packet interacts with at point
**X**is determined randomly. The relative probabilities of this random step are set by the respective extinction coefficients (_{i}*β*^{air}vs.*β*^{aerosol}) at the voxel containing**X**._{i} - If the particle is an aerosol, the photon-packet intensity is attenuated to
*I*_{i}_{+1}=*ϖ*^{aerosol}*I*. If_{i}*I*_{i}_{+1}is lower than a threshold, the packet is stochastically terminated, following [23].23. H. Iwabuchi, “Efficient Monte Carlo Methods for Radiative Transfer Modeling,” Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences

**63**, 2324–2339 (2006). [CrossRef] - The photon-packet is scattered to a new direction, determined by inverse transform sampling, according to the phase function of the particle (Eqs. 5 or 6). This yields a new
*ray*, denoted*ℛ*_{i}_{+1}, emanating from**X**. Local estimation [24_{i}] derives the amount of light back-traced to the sun at each scattering. The next iteration of propagation (denoted24. A. Marshak and A. Davis,

*3D Radiative Transfer in Cloudy Atmospheres*, Physics of Earth and Space Environments (Springer, 2005). [CrossRef]`ii`above) proceeds.

*Haze Blobs*scene, derived by the MC process, using 10000 photons per pixel, from the same viewpoint as Fig. 3(a). Similarly, Fig. 5(a) corresponds to the same viewpoint as Fig. 3(d). Figure 6 shows the contribution by successive scattering orders. They are derived from the MC image. Photons contributing to any pixel are accumulated in steps

`ii`and

`v`above. The contributing photons that stem from just a single scattering event yield Fig. 6(a). Similarly, contributing photons that had experienced exactly two or three scattering events yield respectively Fig. 6(b) and Fig. 6(c). First-order scatter yields most of the energy in the MC image. Radiance by higher order scattering is mostly evident at the horizon. A horizontal LOS passes through a long and dense part of the atmosphere, while a vertical LOS cuts short through the dense, lower part. Hence, toward the horizon the probability of high order scattering increases.

*Haze Blobs*scene. This plot demonstrates consistency in this scene, for most pixels. Figure 7(b) plots the same profiles, where the aerosol density was increased tenfold (see Sec. 8 and the corresponding MC photograph, Fig. 5(d)). In Fig. 7(b) the plots differ more than in Fig. 7(a), due to high order scattering.

## 7. Inverse problem

22. J. V. Martonchik, R. A. Kahn, and D. J. Diner, “Retrieval of aerosol properties over land using MISR observations,” in *Satellite Aerosol Remote Sensing over Land*,, A. A. Kokhanovsky and G. Leeuw, eds. (Springer BerlinHeidelberg, 2009), pp. 267–293. [CrossRef]

**is needed. The data are**

*n**N*

_{views}measured photographs

*𝒞*be the set of all distributions complying with some constraints. Particularly,

**is non-negative, and its spatial support is bounded between the ground and the TOA. The optimization problem is where Here**

*n***masks the area around the sun: in real-world images it is indeed blocked. We mask the horizon, by using a camera whose field of view is a little narrower than hemispherical. This reduces the influence of LOSs that are more strongly affected by high-order scattering (Fig. 6(b)). Consequently, the fit of the imaging model focuses on the bulk image region, where the single scattering model is more valid. In Eq. (25), Ψ(**

*ℳ***) is a regularization term that expresses some prior knowledge on the distribution, while**

*n**η*is the regularization weight.

*smoothness term*, which penalizes for energy in the second order spatial derivatives (3D Laplacian),

*w*(

*k*) = exp[−

*h*(

*k*)/

*H*

^{smooth}]. Overall we use where

**is a matrix representation of the 3D Laplacian operator, and matrix**

*ℒ***W**is diagonal, whose elements are

*w*(

*k*).

*E*with respect to

**is Here the matrix**

*n*

*J*_{ic}(

**) is the Jacobian of the vector**

*n*

*i**with respect to*

_{c}**. Element (Θ,**

*n**k*) of the Jacobian differentiates the intensity in pixel

**Θ**(in viewpoint

*c*) with variation of the aerosol density at voxel

*k*, i.e.,

*∂i*(

_{c}**Θ**)/

*∂n*(

*k*).

*J*_{ic}(

**). First, we provide some results relating to differentiation. Let**

*n***(**

*a***),**

*n***(**

*u***) be vector functions: each outputs a vector of length**

*n**r*. Let

**be a**

*C**r*×

*N*

_{voxels}matrix, where

*N*

_{voxels}is the length of

**. Then, Here 𝔻{**

*n***} is a conversion of a general vector**

*v***into a diagonal matrix, whose main diagonal elements correspond to the elements of**

*v***. Now, let**

*v***(**

*a***) = exp(−**

*n***), where the exponent is element-wise (not raising an operator to some power). Then Using Eq. (29), where**

*Cn***. Using Eq. (28), Based on Eqs. (28), (30) and (31), we derive the Jacobian of Eq. (20) in close-form, where**

*n*## 8. Recovery simulations

25. C. Zhu, R. H. Byrd, P. Lu, and J. Nocedal, “Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization,” ACM Trans. Math. Softw. **23**, 550–560 (1997). [CrossRef]

*nnn*= 0. Satisfactory convergence occurred in several hundred iterations. Depending on the resolution it took between minutes to a couple of hours to complete, in total. The total estimation error can be quantified by the aerosol mass that is over and under-estimated in all voxels, relative to the total aerosol mass in the scene. Using the

*ℓ*

_{1}norm, the total mass relative difference is

*δ*

_{mass}= (||

**||**

*n̂*_{1}− ||

*n*^{true}||

_{1})/||

*n*^{true}||

_{1}. To also sense local errors, we use

*ε*= ||

**−**

*n̂*

*n*^{true}||

_{1}/||

*n*^{true}||

_{1}. These results are listed in Table 1.

**Forward models and distributions**: Figure 8 shows estimation results, corresponding to the original distributions of Fig. 2. Here, the atmosphere domain was defined over a 20 × 20 × 40 grid. Cameras were placed ∼ 7km apart on a 6 × 6 grid. In Figs. 8(a) and 8(b), the single-scattering model was used both in rendering of the raw images, and in the estimation algorithm. In Figs. 8(c) and 8(d), the MC model (multiple scattering) rendered the raw images, over which our recovery (Sec. 7) was tested. Overall, the distributions, the density order of magnitude and values are consistent. Errors in Figs. 8(a) and 8(b) stem from random noise, which had been induced in the raw images. Errors are larger when MC is used to render the images, since high-order scattering is not accounted for in the algorithm of Sec. 7.

**Density of viewpoints**: Keeping the domain and scene (

*Haze blobs*) fixed, we repeated the reconstruction many times, each using a different subset of the above mentioned 36 simulated cameras. Each test randomly selected viewpoints, for various fixed values of

*N*

_{views}< 36. All rendered images used MC. Figure 9 plots the performance. Diminishing returns are obtained beyond

*N*

_{views}≈ 20, which corresponds to ≈ 11km separation between neighboring viewpoints. These tests point to fundamental questions about spatial-angular sampling: how spatially dense should cameras be, and how dense should a camera’s field of view be sampled (in pixels)? This likely depends on the finesse of atmospheric structure sought, and the level of optical diffusion achieved by various aerosols. The novel tomography domain introduced here thus raises new theoretical questions that will require extensive further research.

**Aerosol characteristics**: We used the

*Haze blobs*scene, but varied the aerosol characteristics. Compared to the aerosol described in Sec. 5, we tested two variations. In one variation, the phase function was isotropic, i.e., [

*g*

_{R},

*g*

_{G},

*g*

_{B}] = [0, 0, 0]. In the other variation, the aerosol is partly absorbing: its single scattering albedo per color channel is

*N*

_{views}= 36 are shown in Figs. 10(a) and 10(b) and in Table 1. The results indicate that if the aerosol’s phase function has smaller anisotropy, recovery of the aerosol’s density is easier. We hypothesize that tomography is better served by scattering isotropy, since then significant radiance from any voxel reaches cameras in a wide range of directions. This may make back-projection (recovery from cameras to voxels) more accurate. On the other hand, if the phase function is too strongly peaked around one direction, most cameras would not receive much scattered radiance from a voxel, undermining tomography. A very broad research is needed to verify and quantify such dependencies.

**Density scale**: We used the aerosol

*Haze blobs*distribution and characteristics as described in Sec. 5, but increased the aerosol density tenfold everywhere. This significantly increases the effects of high order scattering, as shown in Fig. 7(b) and Fig. 5(d). Consequently,

*ε*increases (Table 1), when using

*N*

_{views}= 36. Still, Fig. 10(c) shows that the spatial distribution outlines are recovered similarly to the other tests.

## 9. Discussion

26. N. J. Pust, A. R. Dahlberg, M. J. Thomas, and J. a. Shaw, “Comparison of full-sky polarization and radiance observations to radiative transfer simulations which employ AERONET products,” Opt. Express **19**, 18602–18613 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

## Acknowledgments

## References and links

1. | A. Stern and B. Javidi, “Three-dimensional image sensing, visualization, and processing using integral imaging,” Proceedings of the IEEE |

2. | J. Kim, D. Lanman, Y. Mukaigawa, and R. Raskar, “Descattering transmission via angular filtering,” in |

3. | M. Levoy, R. Ng, A. Adams, M. Footer, and M. Horowitz, “Light field microscopy,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) |

4. | U. Dayan, B. Ziv, T. Shoob, and Y. Enzel, “Suspended dust over southeastern Mediterranean and its relation to atmospheric circulations,” International Journal of Climatology |

5. | O. V. Kalashnikova, M. J. Garay, A. B. Davis, D. J. Diner, and J. V. Martonchik, “Sensitivity of multi-angle photo-polarimetry to vertical layering and mixing of absorbing aerosols: Quantifying measurement uncertainties,” Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer |

6. | M. I. Mishchenko and I. V. Geogdzhayev, “Satellite remote sensing reveals regional tropospheric aerosol trends,” Opt. Express |

7. | J. Martonchik, D. D. J. Diner, J. M. David, R. Kahn, T. P. Ackerman, M. M. Verstraete, B. Pinty, and H. R. Gordon, “Techniques for the Retrieval of Aerosol Properties over Land and Ocean Using Multi-angle Imaging,” IEEE Trans. on Geoscience and Remote Sensing |

8. | E. Namer, S. Shwartz, and Y. Y. Schechner, “Skyless polarimetric calibration and visibility enhancement,” Opt. Express |

9. | A. Bluestone, G. Abdoulaev, C. Schmitz, R. Barbour, and A. Hielscher, “Three-dimensional optical tomography of hemodynamics in the human head,” Opt. Express |

10. | I. Ihrke, K. N. Kutulakos, H. P. Lensch, M. Magnor, and W. Heidrich, “State of the art in transparent and specular object reconstruction,” in EUROGRAPHICS 2008 STAR–STATE OF THE ART REPORT , (2008). |

11. | D. A. Boas, D. H. Brooks, E. L. Miller, C. A. DiMarzio, M. Kilmer, R. J. Gaudette, and Q. Zhang, “Imaging the body with diffuse optical tomography,” Sig.Proc. Magazine |

12. | H. Messer, A. Zinevich, and P. Alpert, “Environmental sensor networks using existing wireless communication systems for rainfall and wind velocity measurements,” IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine |

13. | J. Gregson, M. Krimerman, M. B. Hullin, and W. Heidrich, “Stochastic tomography and its applications in 3D imaging of
mixing fluids,” ACM Trans. Graph. |

14. | B. R. Cosofret, D. Konno, A. Faghfouri, H. S. Kindle, C. M. Gittins, M. L. Finson, T. E. Janov, M. J. Levreault, R. K. Miyashiro, and W. J. Marinelli, “Imaging sensor constellation for tomographic chemical cloud mapping,” Appl. Opt. |

15. | J. A. Aviles, “The Development and Validation of a First Generation X-Ray Scatter Computed Tomography Algorithm for the Reconstruction of Electron Density Breast Images Using Monte Carlo Simulation,” Ph.D. thesis (2011). |

16. | W. M. Cornette and J. G. Shanks, “Physically reasonable analytic expression for the single-scattering phase function,” Appl. Opt. |

17. | L. Levi, |

18. | L. Devroye, “Sample-based non-uniform random variate generation,” in Proceedings of the 18th conference on Winter simulation , (ACM, 1986), pp. 260–265. [CrossRef] |

19. | S.-H. Hong, J.-S. Jang, and B. Javidi, “Three-dimensional volumetric object reconstruction using computational integral imaging,” Opt. Express |

20. | M. Charity, “Blackbody color datafile,” (2001), http://www.vendian.org/mncharity/dir3/blackbody/UnstableURLs/bbr\_color.html. |

21. | Wikipedia, “Sunlight — Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,” (2012), http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sunlight\&oldid=502554571. |

22. | J. V. Martonchik, R. A. Kahn, and D. J. Diner, “Retrieval of aerosol properties over land using MISR observations,” in |

23. | H. Iwabuchi, “Efficient Monte Carlo Methods for Radiative Transfer Modeling,” Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences |

24. | A. Marshak and A. Davis, |

25. | C. Zhu, R. H. Byrd, P. Lu, and J. Nocedal, “Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization,” ACM Trans. Math. Softw. |

26. | N. J. Pust, A. R. Dahlberg, M. J. Thomas, and J. a. Shaw, “Comparison of full-sky polarization and radiance observations to radiative transfer simulations which employ AERONET products,” Opt. Express |

**OCIS Codes**

(100.3190) Image processing : Inverse problems

(280.1100) Remote sensing and sensors : Aerosol detection

(280.1310) Remote sensing and sensors : Atmospheric scattering

(280.4991) Remote sensing and sensors : Passive remote sensing

(100.3200) Image processing : Inverse scattering

**ToC Category:**

Remote Sensing

**History**

Original Manuscript: August 5, 2013

Revised Manuscript: October 10, 2013

Manuscript Accepted: October 10, 2013

Published: October 22, 2013

**Virtual Issues**

December 3, 2013 *Spotlight on Optics*

**Citation**

Amit Aides, Yoav Y. Schechner, Vadim Holodovsky, Michael J. Garay, and Anthony B. Davis, "Multi sky-view 3D aerosol distribution recovery," Opt. Express **21**, 25820-25833 (2013)

http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-21-22-25820

Sort: Year | Journal | Reset

### References

- A. Stern and B. Javidi, “Three-dimensional image sensing, visualization, and processing using integral imaging,” Proceedings of the IEEE94.3 (2006).
- J. Kim, D. Lanman, Y. Mukaigawa, and R. Raskar, “Descattering transmission via angular filtering,” in Proc. ECCV’ 10, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010), pp. 86–99.
- M. Levoy, R. Ng, A. Adams, M. Footer, and M. Horowitz, “Light field microscopy,” ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)25, 924–934 (2006). [CrossRef]
- U. Dayan, B. Ziv, T. Shoob, and Y. Enzel, “Suspended dust over southeastern Mediterranean and its relation to atmospheric circulations,” International Journal of Climatology924, 915–924 (2008). [CrossRef]
- O. V. Kalashnikova, M. J. Garay, A. B. Davis, D. J. Diner, and J. V. Martonchik, “Sensitivity of multi-angle photo-polarimetry to vertical layering and mixing of absorbing aerosols: Quantifying measurement uncertainties,” Journal of Quantitative Spectroscopy and Radiative Transfer112, 2149–2163 (2011). [CrossRef]
- M. I. Mishchenko and I. V. Geogdzhayev, “Satellite remote sensing reveals regional tropospheric aerosol trends,” Opt. Express15, 7423–38 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- J. Martonchik, D. D. J. Diner, J. M. David, R. Kahn, T. P. Ackerman, M. M. Verstraete, B. Pinty, and H. R. Gordon, “Techniques for the Retrieval of Aerosol Properties over Land and Ocean Using Multi-angle Imaging,” IEEE Trans. on Geoscience and Remote Sensing36, 1212–1227 (1998). [CrossRef]
- E. Namer, S. Shwartz, and Y. Y. Schechner, “Skyless polarimetric calibration and visibility enhancement,” Opt. Express17, 472–93 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- A. Bluestone, G. Abdoulaev, C. Schmitz, R. Barbour, and A. Hielscher, “Three-dimensional optical tomography of hemodynamics in the human head,” Opt. Express9, 272–86 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- I. Ihrke, K. N. Kutulakos, H. P. Lensch, M. Magnor, and W. Heidrich, “State of the art in transparent and specular object reconstruction,” in EUROGRAPHICS 2008 STAR–STATE OF THE ART REPORT, (2008).
- D. A. Boas, D. H. Brooks, E. L. Miller, C. A. DiMarzio, M. Kilmer, R. J. Gaudette, and Q. Zhang, “Imaging the body with diffuse optical tomography,” Sig.Proc. Magazine18, 57–75 (2001). [CrossRef]
- H. Messer, A. Zinevich, and P. Alpert, “Environmental sensor networks using existing wireless communication systems for rainfall and wind velocity measurements,” IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine15, 32–38 (2012). [CrossRef]
- J. Gregson, M. Krimerman, M. B. Hullin, and W. Heidrich, “Stochastic tomography and its applications in 3D imaging of mixing fluids,” ACM Trans. Graph.31, 52:1–52 (2012). [CrossRef]
- B. R. Cosofret, D. Konno, A. Faghfouri, H. S. Kindle, C. M. Gittins, M. L. Finson, T. E. Janov, M. J. Levreault, R. K. Miyashiro, and W. J. Marinelli, “Imaging sensor constellation for tomographic chemical cloud mapping,” Appl. Opt.48, 1837–52 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- J. A. Aviles, “The Development and Validation of a First Generation X-Ray Scatter Computed Tomography Algorithm for the Reconstruction of Electron Density Breast Images Using Monte Carlo Simulation,” Ph.D. thesis (2011).
- W. M. Cornette and J. G. Shanks, “Physically reasonable analytic expression for the single-scattering phase function,” Appl. Opt.31, 3152–3160 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- L. Levi, Applied Optics (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1980).
- L. Devroye, “Sample-based non-uniform random variate generation,” in Proceedings of the 18th conference on Winter simulation, (ACM, 1986), pp. 260–265. [CrossRef]
- S.-H. Hong, J.-S. Jang, and B. Javidi, “Three-dimensional volumetric object reconstruction using computational integral imaging,” Opt. Express12, 483–491 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- M. Charity, “Blackbody color datafile,” (2001), http://www.vendian.org/mncharity/dir3/blackbody/UnstableURLs/bbr\_color.html .
- Wikipedia, “Sunlight — Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,” (2012), http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sunlight\&oldid=502554571 .
- J. V. Martonchik, R. A. Kahn, and D. J. Diner, “Retrieval of aerosol properties over land using MISR observations,” in Satellite Aerosol Remote Sensing over Land,, A. A. Kokhanovsky and G. Leeuw, eds. (Springer BerlinHeidelberg, 2009), pp. 267–293. [CrossRef]
- H. Iwabuchi, “Efficient Monte Carlo Methods for Radiative Transfer Modeling,” Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences63, 2324–2339 (2006). [CrossRef]
- A. Marshak and A. Davis, 3D Radiative Transfer in Cloudy Atmospheres, Physics of Earth and Space Environments (Springer, 2005). [CrossRef]
- C. Zhu, R. H. Byrd, P. Lu, and J. Nocedal, “Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization,” ACM Trans. Math. Softw.23, 550–560 (1997). [CrossRef]
- N. J. Pust, A. R. Dahlberg, M. J. Thomas, and J. a. Shaw, “Comparison of full-sky polarization and radiance observations to radiative transfer simulations which employ AERONET products,” Opt. Express19, 18602–18613 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

## Cited By |
Alert me when this paper is cited |

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article | Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.