IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 10, NO.
6, JUNE 2017 2431
Simulation Study of Geometric Characteristics and
Coverage for Moon-Based Earth Observation in the
Electro-Optical Region
Yuanzhen Ren, Huadong Guo, Member, IEEE, Guang Liu, Member, IEEE, and Hanlin Ye, Student Member, IEEE
Abstract—Large-scale geoscience phenomena are increasingly
attracting more attention because of their great scientific and so-
cial significance. However, many existing earth observation sys-
tems lack the ability to conduct long-term continuous observations
at a regional-to-global scale because of spatial and temporal cov-
erage limitations and systematic bias. In this work, we propose a
new platform, the moon, and discuss its potential and optical ge-
ometrical characteristics for observing large-scale geoscience phe-
nomena. Based on the Jet Propulsion Laboratory ephemerides,
the reference systems transformation and a simulation system of
moon-based earth observations were developed. Numerous exper-
iments were carried out and a series of simulation images are pre-
sented, which illustrate the wide swath and continuous observation
characteristics of such a lunar observatory. In order to quantify
the performance of moon-based earth observations, a simplified
geometrical model was constructed and data were analyzed. The
sublunar points were found to be unique parameters with the abil-
ity to characterize the relative positions between moon and earth.
We also defined an effective coverage parameter for assessing the
optical coverage ability of moon-based earth observations. The
calculation showed that the average value of the introduced cov-
erage parameter from 1960 to 2050 was 0.500, and the coverage
remained stable in different years. Furthermore, the total daily
visible time and repeated times of different positions on the earth
surface are analyzed and the effect of different positions on the
lunar surface of the observatory are evaluated. The result shows
that such a moon-based approach could make significant contribu-
tions to the monitoring and understanding of large-scale geoscience
phenomena.
Index Terms—Geometric modeling, large-scale geoscience
phenomena, moon-based earth observation, simulation.
Manuscript received September 29, 2016; revised February 3, 2017 and March
22, 2017; accepted May 30, 2017. Date of publication June 11, 2017; date
of current version July 17, 2017. This work was supported in part by the
National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 41590852, Grant
41590850, and Grant 41001264 and in part by the Strategic Pioneer Program
on Space Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, under Grant XDA04077200.
(Corresponding author: Guang Liu.)
Y. Ren and H. Ye are with the Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China, and also with the College
of Resources and Environment, University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Beijing 100049, China (e-mail: ryz1123@163.com; yehl@radi.ac.cn).
H. Guo and G. Liu are with the Institute of Remote Sensing and Dig-
ital Earth, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China (e-mail:
hdguo@radi.ac.cn; liuguang@radi.ac.cn).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSTARS.2017.2711061
1939-1404 © 2017 IEEE. Translations and content mining are permitted for academic research only. Personal use is also permitted, but republication/redistribution
requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
I. INTRODUCTION
ECENTLY, increasingly more attention has been devoted
R to large-scale geoscience phenomena, such as global en-
vironmental change, because of their great scientific and social
significance. Geoscience studies emphasize holistic, compre-
hensive research on various components of the earth, and it has
become possible to observe, analyze, and simulate various pro-
cesses with the development of space technology [1]. However,
it is only possible to observe large-scale geoscience phenomena
at limited temporal and spatial scales on the earth with cur-
rent space-borne, airborne, and ground-based platforms. Thus,
a more effective platform to conduct studies of large-scale geo-
science phenomena is needed [2].
The moon is the only natural satellite of earth, and an ob-
servatory located on the moon would be able to continuously
and comprehensively monitor the earth on a global scale; thus,
the moon represents an ideal platform for observing large-scale
geoscience phenomena [3]. While it is obvious that the distance
between the moon and earth is much larger than that of exist-
ing earth observation platforms, that this may pose problems in
terms of lower spatial resolution and higher transmission energy
demands, and that the harsh environmental conditions would
make it challenging to construct a lunar observatory, such work
could still be very valuable. Thanks to on-going lunar probe
projects [4]–[6] carried out by several countries and improve-
ments in high spatial resolution earth observation capabilities
[7], researchers have shown that it is feasible to deploy sensors
on the moon to observe the earth in order to study large-scale
geoscience phenomena. Compared with spaceborne, airborne,
and ground-based earth observations, moon-based observations
have unique characteristics and can be used to complement exist-
ing observational programs [8]. The advantages of moon-based
observations are as follows.
1) One side of the moon is always facing the earth, and
therefore, it could be possible to observe a certain area of
the earth over a long period of time from various angles.
2) It could be possible to simultaneously observe and acquire
data on the entire moon-facing hemisphere of the earth and
realize large-scale observations of the earth, which would
be more suitable for continuous observations of global
periodic phenomena.
3) The moon is a natural satellite of earth with stable geo-
logical conditions and abundant space, and thus, it would
2432 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 10, NO. 6, JUNE 2017

be possible to install various sensors to measure parame-

ters ranging from the subsurface to the ionosphere simul-
taneously, and thereby achieve synchronous integrated
observations.
4) The longevity of a lunar platform would allow collection
of long-term time series data to compare with satellite
data, which is critical to large-scale earth science phe-
nomena research.
Many researchers have considered the possibility of moon-
based observation of the earth. Johnson et al. [9] analyzed the
scientific targets and appropriate system parameters of earth
observations and discussed the advantages and limitations of
moon-based optical observations of the earth. Guo [10] proposed
to probe into ways of setting up an observatory on the moon
containing a group of remote sensors to complement global en-
vironmental change research on a global scale. Pallé and Goode
[11] proposed a set of visible/thermal infrared earth observa-
tion system parameters from the perspective of surface albedo
acquisition. Moccia and Renga [12] proposed a moon-based
interferometric synthetic aperture radar (SAR) for the purpose
of high spatial resolution and high temporal resolution surface Fig. 1. Depiction of the procedure for constructing the simulation system. The
mapping. Zhang [13] discussed moon-based earth observation JPL ephemerides are used in this paper as the source data for calculating the
original celestial body positions. We assume a location of the sensor over the
simulation technology based on the Jet Propulsion Laboratory lunar surface, and then evaluate the relative geometry between the earth surface,
(JPL) ephemerides, and conducted preliminary analyses of the sun, and sensor. Considering the perspective of the moon-based earth obser-
regularity of the observed illumination area. Guo et al. [14] vations, related reference systems and their transformations are introduced for
visual positions. We establish the simulation system with the Microsoft Foun-
proposed to set up a moon-based SAR for global change mon- dation Classes framework and OpenGL (Open Graphics Library). Among the
itoring. Considering the observation over a long distance, Ding several elements involved with the simulation system construction, the selection
[15] analyzed the restrictions of a moon-based SAR system and and resolution of JPL ephemerides and the reference system transformations are
the core issues, which comprise the essential foundation of building the system.
proposed several possible solutions to these limitations. Ren
et al. [16] discussed the potentials and characteristics of moon-
based earth observation. Ye et al. [17] generated the moon-based
observation Boolean matrixes and analyzed the sensitive regions
of global change based on a lunar observatory. Ren et al. [18]
calculated the spatial and angular visibility of the moon plat-
form for “the Belt and Road” (The Silk Road Economic Belt and
the 21st-century Maritime Silk Road) region. At present, moon-
based earth observations are at a preliminary stage. Simulations
are adopted in this paper since they are a good alternative for
assessing moon-based earth observation potentials.
The aim of this paper is to deepen the understanding of the ge-
ometrical characteristics for optical sensors of moon-based earth
observations, so as to provide a contribution to the monitoring of
large-scale geoscience phenomena. Inspired by previous work,
this paper makes three contributions. The first is to develop the
Fig. 2. Flowchart of reference systems transformation.
reference systems transformation of moon-based earth obser-
vation, considering the sensor, lunar, and terrestrial attitudes,
established based on the motions of these three celestial bodies.
and the positions of the sun, earth, and moon. Second, we cal-
The Fig. 1 shows the key processes.
culate the total daily visible time and the number of repeated
observations for different positions on earth surface in a year.
Finally, we define the effective coverage and evaluate the effects A. JPL Ephemerides
of different locations for lunar observatories on the coverage. The planetary and lunar ephemerides provide the positions
and velocities of certain celestial bodies at a given time, and
data are generated by fitting numerically integrated orbits
II. DATA AND SIMULATION SYSTEM of the moon and planets to observations. The JPL Develop-
The sun, earth, and moon together with their peculiar or- ment Ephemeris (DE) series are the most popular ephemerides
bits form a natural system. In order to quantify the characteris- among the international astronomical community. The JPL
tics of moon-based earth observations, a simulation system was ephemerides provide planetary three-dimensional Cartesian
REN et al.: SIMULATION STUDY OF GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS AND COVERAGE FOR MOON-BASED EARTH OBSERVATION 2433

reference data based on the heliocentric reference system in the where r G is the position vector in the GCRS, rH is the position
form of Chebyshev interpolation polynomials, which contain vector in the HCRS, and r HG is the relative position vector
Chebyshev interpolation polynomial coefficients of a certain from the sun to earth, which can be calculated from the JPL
time span [19]. There are a sequence of DE ephemerides, such ephemeris.
as DE405, DE410, DE421, DE430, and so forth, among which 2) GCRS to SCRS: This transformation is similar to that
the DE430, a general purpose ephemeris, includes the nutation described above.
and libration with suitable time spans. Therefore, it was selected 3) SCRS to PALRS: The orientation of the lunar exterior
as the data source for this study [20]. (mantle and crust, hereafter referred to by the mantle) is
The steps in data processing are as follows. parameterized by Euler angles, φ m , θ m , and ψ m . They
1) Read the ephemeris’ header files and data files, and then are defined as follows: φ m , the angle from the X-axis of
merge each part of them chronologically. the celestial reference system along the XY plane to the
2) Based on the given Julian time, obtain the corresponding intersection of the mantle equator; θ m , the inclination of
ephemeris data, and then, calculate the positions and speed the mantle equator from the celestial reference system XY
of each celestial body by interpolation. plane; and ψ m , the longitude from the intersection of the
3) According to the observational perspectives of the simu- celestial reference system XY plane with the mantle equa-
lation, carry out reference system transformations. tor along the mantle equator to the prime meridian. These
three Euler angles have already contained the libration
B. Transformations of the Reference Systems information.
There are a few reference systems related to moon-based earth Position vectors expressed in the PALRS r P A can be ex-
observations. It is essential to handle the different reference sys- pressed as coordinate vectors in the SCRS r S by using the
tems for calculating the celestial bodies’ positions from different following relation:
perspectives. At the beginning, the celestial reference systems
r
S = Rz (−φm ) Rx (−θm ) Rz (−ψm ) r
P A. (2)
are introduced [21]. The celestial sphere is an imaginary sphere
of arbitrarily large radius. Certain reference lines and planes on Here, the rotation matrices Rx , Ry , and Rz are right-handed
earth, when projected onto the celestial sphere, form the bases rotations of frame orientations defined by
of the reference systems. These include the earth’s equator, axis, ⎛ ⎞
and orbit. At their intersections with the celestial sphere, these 1 0 0
form the celestial equator, the north and south celestial poles, ⎜ ⎟
Rx (α) = ⎝ 0 cos α sin α ⎠ (3)
and the ecliptic, respectively. The XY reference plane is a plane
0 − sin α cos α
through the celestial sphere’s center perpendicular to the axis,
⎛ ⎞
with the X-axis pointing to the vernal equinox. It is obvious that cos α 0 − sin α
all celestial reference systems are all equatorial reference sys- ⎜ ⎟
Ry (α) = ⎝ 0 1 0 ⎠ (4)
tems. When celestial spheres’ centers are selected as the center
of the sun, earth, or moon, three different celestial reference sin α 0 cos α
systems are defined, namely, the heliocentric celestial reference ⎛ ⎞
cos α sin α 0
system (HCRS), geocentric celestial reference system (GCRS), ⎜ ⎟
and selenocentric celestial reference system (SCRS), respec- Rz (α) = ⎝ − sin α cos α 0⎠ . (5)
tively. It is also necessary to utilize the international terrestrial 0 0 1
reference system (ITRS) when dealing with the parameters re-
lated to earth surface [22]. Analogously, the principal axis lunar 4) The transformation to be used for relating the ITRS to the
reference system (PALRS) is introduced for the parameters re- GCRS at date t is shown below:
lated to the lunar surface [23]. In addition to reference systems
related to the celestial bodies, there are reference systems for the [GCRS] = Q (t) R (t) W (t) [ITRS] (6)
optical sensors, such as the image reference system, sensor ref- where Q(t), R(t), and W (t) are the transformation matrices
erence system, and body reference system [24]. From the image arising from the motion of the celestial pole in the celestial
reference system to sensor reference system, the main calibra- reference system, from the rotation of the earth around the axis
tion parameters consist of the focal length and distortion. From associated with the pole, and from polar motion, respectively.
the sensor reference system to body reference system, the aim is Similar to (3), (4), and (5), R1 , R2 , and R3 can be intro-
to correct misalignment [25], [26]. These two transformations duced to denote rotation matrices with positive angles about the
occur inside the sensor, so are not analyzed in this paper. The axes 1, 2, and 3 of the coordinate frame. The position of the
Fig. 2 presents the transformation of related reference systems. celestial intermediate pole (CIP) both in the ITRS and GCRS
The remainder of this section is a brief discussion of the required is provided by the x and y components of the CIP unit vector.
transformations. These components are referred as “coordinates” in the following
1) HCRS to GCRS: Ignoring the influence of relativity the- work, and they are converted in the form of arc seconds with
ory, the transformation between these systems is a simple respect to the polar axis of the reference system.
translation: The coordinate transformation from the ITRS to GCRS is
r 
G =r G − r
HG (1) expressed in terms of the three fundamental components as
2434 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 10, NO. 6, JUNE 2017

given below:
W (t) = R3 (−s ) R2 (xp ) R1 (yp ) (7)
where xp and yp are the “polar coordinates” of the CIP in
the ITRS and s is a quantity that provides the position of the
terrestrial ephemeris origin (TEO) on the equator of the CIP
corresponding to the kinematical definition of the nonrotating
origin (NRO) in the ITRS when the CIP is moving with respect
to the ITRS due to polar motion. We define t0 as J2000.0 Epoch
time, or 2451545.0 in the form of a Julian date. The expression
of s as a function of the coordinates xp and yp is

t

s (t) = (1/2) (xp ẏp − ẋp yp ) dt. (8)
t0

The use of s is necessary to provide an exact realization of
the “instantaneous prime meridian.” Fig. 3. Moon-based earth observation simulation images in 2015. The same
UTC time is considered for all the represented days.
R (t) = R3 (−θ) (9)
where θ is the earth rotation angle between the celestial For a lunar observatory, this step is different from that of a
ephemeris origin (CEO) and the TEO at date t on the equator satellite sensor since the moon is so large that its barycenter is
of the CIP, which provides a rigorous definition of the sidereal different from the barycenter of a satellite.
rotation of the earth.
Q (t) = R3 (−E) R2 (−d) R3 (E) R3 (s) . (10) III. SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS
There are various large-scale geoscience phenomena such
Here, E and d help to define the coordinates of the CIP in the
as earth tides, energy budgets, middle and upper atmospheric
GCRS as follows:
motion, and dynamic ocean processes [27]–[30]. These all cover
X = sin d cos E, Y = sin d sin E, Z = cos d (11) a large range of areas, and therefore, sensors with large swaths,
good coverages, and continuous observing times are required to
and s is a quantity that provides the position of the CEO on the monitor them appropriately. In order to estimate the feasibility
equator of the CIP corresponding to the kinematical definition of using moon-based earth observations to study large-scale
of the NRO in the GCRS when the CIP is moving with respect geoscience phenomena, a series of optical simulation images
to the GCRS between the reference epoch and the epoch t due are presented, a simplified geometrical model is constructed,
to precession and nutation. Its expression as a function of the and several related parameters of optical sensors are analyzed
coordinates X and Y is so as to provide a reference for large-scale scientific observations

t  
of geoscience phenomena.
X (t) Ẏ (t) − Y (t) Ẋ (t)
s (t) = − dt
t0 1 + Z (t)
A. Simulation Experiments
− (σ0 N0 − Σ0 N0 ) (12) Based on the introduced simulation system, moon-based earth
where σ0 and Σ0 are the position of the CEO at J2000.0 and observation images can be generated. It is very difficult to sim-
the x-origin of the GCRS, respectively, and N0 is the ascending ulate cloud cover and other atmospheric effects, so we ignored
node of the equator at J2000.0 in the equator of the GCRS. this part of the image and defined the images as coverage images,
The value of the parameters can be calculated from the Inter- which focused on the geometrical characteristics of moon-based
national Astronomical Union (IAU) 2000 resolutions with the earth observations. Two groups of simulation images were cho-
data of the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems sen for comparisons on different dates in a year and different
Service (IERS). times in a day. Since sensors on the moon are able to observe
5) Body reference system to PALRS: There are two steps, up to half of the earth, this scale is much larger than that of
which involve rotation and translation. The rotation an- conventional observations taken with low or middle earth orbit-
gles are roll, pitch, and yaw angles defined as ap (t), ing satellites. We therefore define the effective coverage as the
ar (t), and ay (t), respectively. The translation vector is observed proportion of the earth’s facing hemisphere.
r Here, we assume putting the optical sensors in the center
P B , which is from the center of the moon to the center
of the sensor. The vector r of the near side of moon, neglecting the effect of the actual
B is expressed in terms of the
body reference system. So, the transformation formula is selenographic latitude and longitudes of the sensor over lunar
surface. Fig. 3 shows that moon-based earth observation areas
P A = r
r 
P B + Rx (ap (t)) Ry (ar (t)) Rz ( ay (t)) r B. will change with the passage of time and that the locations and
(13) attitudes of earth relative to the moon are also changing. As
REN et al.: SIMULATION STUDY OF GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS AND COVERAGE FOR MOON-BASED EARTH OBSERVATION
Fig. 4. Moon-based earth observation simulation images on October 6, 2015,
at different UTC times.
expected the observation areas are different at the same time on
different dates. Fig. 4 shows that the total coverage that can be
observed throughout a day remains stable, but the positions that
can be seen on earth change with time. From both figures, it is
obvious that moon-based earth observations show great poten-
tial in terms of the large coverage area, but such data will have
relatively low spatial resolution. At certain positions, continuous
observations for long periods of time are possible. In addition,
the revisiting period is short, and thus, the lunar observatory
has a high temporal resolution. Consequently, there are signifi-
cant similarities between moon-based earth observations and the
general requirements for observation of large-scale geoscience
phenomena. This paper demonstrates that a lunar observatory
could provide global-scale observations that would be helpful
in studies on some specific characteristics and on the laws gov-
erning long-term and large-scale geoscience phenomena; such
an observatory would thereby deepen our understanding of the
earth.
B. Geometrical Model and Sublunar Points
Since the lunar revolution period is equal to its rotation period,
the moon is always facing the earth with its near side, which is
referred to as tidal locking. In addition, there are oscillations of
the moon called librations; in a moon-fixed reference frame, this
causes the moon– earth direction to change slightly. This issue
adds to the difficulties of determining the lunar observatory’s
precise positioning. It is obvious that the distance between the
earth and moon is much larger than the radius of the earth, and
thus, the angular distance between observing points of the lunar
observatory will be very small. Furthermore, earth’s surface cur-
vature is an important factor to consider in imaging quality, and
the surface curvature will necessitate use of a suitable method
for geometric corrections.
These are all optical geometrical parameters of moon-based
earth observations. In order to determine their characteristics,
a geometrical model was constructed. Fig. 5 presents the sim-
plified moon-based earth observation geometrical model. We
assumed that earth is a sphere, the moon is fixed, and earth is
2435
Fig. 5. Simplified moon-based earth observation geometrical model. O m is
the lunar observatory, B m is the selenocenter, O e is the geocenter, and O s is
the sun. M 1 and M 2 are the tangent lines of the earth profile through O m ,
which indicate the boundary of the moon-based earth observations. The sunlit
area boundary on earth and the earth profile overlap at points S 1 and S 2 . Line
O m O e intersects the earth profile on point L, which is the substellar point
of the lunar observatory. Then, the intersection of the sunlit area on the earth
and moon-based observing area, which is also the shadow area in the figure,
represents the actual moon-based earth observational area.
Fig. 6. Latitudes of sublunar points in 2015.
rotating, and we neglected higher order motions associated with
the libration. There are several parameters shown that could be
derived from the model, such as sublunar points, observation
areas, and local incident angles. Here, the sublunar point means
the point on the earth where lunar observatory is perceived to
be directly overhead in zenith. Among these parameters, the
sublunar points are very special because of their ability to char-
acterize the relative positions and attitudes between the moon
and earth; hence, further work focuses on these sublunar points.
The distance between the earth and moon is much larger
than the radius of the moon, so a lunar observatory point is
approximately equivalent to the barycenter of the moon. Thus,
their sublunar points are equivalent. First, the daily latitudes
and longitudes of the sublunar points were calculated. Since
the regularity of their variation in different years is similar,
we arbitrarily calculated the values in 2015 with the interval
of a day. The longitudes varied between 180 °E and 180 °W
smoothly with a period of a sidereal month. The Fig. 6 depicts
the latitudes of sublunar points in 2015. The latitudes varied
between 19 °N and 19 °S with the same period, and thus, they
showed a type of sinusoidal variation. However, there was a little
difference in the latitudes’ extremums between months. Then,
2436 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 10, NO. 6, JUNE 2017
Fig. 7. Annual statistics for the extremums of sublunar point latitudes from
1960 to 2050. Max refers to the maximum values of northern latitudes in a
certain year. Min refers to the maximum values of southern latitudes. Average
refers to the average values of the latitudes in a year. The STD refers to the STD
values of the latitudes in a year.
Fig. 8. Daily moon-based earth observation effective coverage in 2015.
the latitudes of different years were calculated and the statis-
tics of the extremums were recorded; these data are shown in
Fig. 7.
Fig. 7 shows the latitudinal statistical values. The maximum
values of the northern latitudes varied between 18.462 °N and
28.722 °N, and those of the southern latitudes varied between
18.498 °S and 28.726 °S. They were almost symmetrical in ev-
ery year. There was a distinct period of latitudinal variation of
approximately 19 years. The maximum, minimum, and standard
deviation (STD) values all followed the periodicity, but the av-
erage values did not have a clear period. Coincidentally, the axis
perpendicular to the lunar orbit’s plane precessed clockwise in
the ecliptic, with a period of 18.6 years. Actually, the movement
of the axis contributes to the variation of the sublunar points. As
a consequence, their periods were equal.
According to the regularity, imaging times should be ap-
propriately arranged for the target in order to avoid serious
geometrical distortion. It is also clear that moon-based earth ob-
servations have a one-day revisiting period without regard to the
small drift of latitudes, which is a favorable frequency for essen-
tially continuous monitoring of certain large-scale geoscience
phenomena.
C. Effective Coverage Analysis
Coverage is an important indicator to measure the perfor-
mance of observations. By taking advantages of the simplified
geometrical model, the optical coverage ability of moon-based
earth observations can be derived. On account of the small view-
ing angle, moon-based observations were taken as hemisphere
observations for approximation. The sunlit area on earth is also a
hemisphere, and the moon-based observation effective coverage
is the overlapping area accounting for the hemisphere.
In order to represent the normal directions of the two hemi-
spheres, we utilized the intersection points (L and S) of the
connecting lines (Om Oe and Os Oe ) with earth’s surface, which
were obtained by the simulation system. Latitudes and longi-
tudes were defined with the φ and ξ, while referring to L(φ1 , ξ1 )
and S(φ2 , ξ2 ), respectively. As a consequence, the two normal
directions are
n̂1 = s (cosφ1 cosξ1 , cosφ1 sinξ1 , sinφ1 )
. (14)
n̂2 = l (cosφ2 cosξ2 , cosφ2 sinξ2 , sinφ2 )
By the law of cosines, the angle between the two vectors can
be calculated as follows:
θ = arccos(cosφ1 cosφ2 cosξ1 cosξ2
+ cosφ1 cosφ2 sinξ1 sinξ2 + sinφ1 sinφ2 ). (15)
Thus, the effective coverage C is
C = (180 − θ) /180. (16)
The variation of C in each year is similar, so we arbitrarily
chose the time range of one year (2015) with daily observa-
tions. As shown in Fig. 8, it is obvious that the period of C was
a sidereal month, and there was little difference between each
month. The reason for this is that the lunar revolution plane
does not coincide with that of the earth, and there is approx-
imately a 5° angle between the two planes, thus, leading to
the average coverage change in different months. In addition,
the coverage changes smoothly with a nearly constant absolute
value, suggesting that stable coverage could be achieved by the
lunar observatory. The average value of C in 2015 was 0.492,
thus, indicating good performance of the observation coverage.
Under good conditions, which occur once per month, roughly,
the coverage can be up to almost 1, meaning coverage of the
entire hemisphere. Next, we calculated the C value from 1960
to 2050 in order to survey the long-term performance.
Fig. 9 depicts the variation of the statistical values of C for
each year from 1960 to 2050. The most remarkable feature is the
stability. The four statistical values remained nearly the same
every year, which is very different from the sublunar points; this
indicates that there is no direct correlation between the effective
coverage and the movement of sublunar points. The extrema
of every-year max C were 0.999 and 0.984. Despite the small
difference, nearly complete hemisphere observations could be
acquired in each year. The overall average value of C was 0.500,
which reveals a rather good total coverage of earth.
However, effective coverage only refers to the global cover-
age, and does not indicate the coverage of any specified position
on the earth’s surface. It is necessary to define those points on the
REN et al.: SIMULATION STUDY OF GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS AND COVERAGE FOR MOON-BASED EARTH OBSERVATION 2437

TABLE I
AVERAGE VALUE OF VISIBLE SPAN PER DAY OF DIFFERENT POINTS IN
2015 (MIN)

180 °W 135 °W 90 °W 45 °W 0° 45 °E 90 °E 135 °E

75° S 325.71 324.30 324.32 323.32 323.30 323.84 324.18 323.99

60° S 340.11 339.84 339.62 339.21 339.07 338.96 339.40 339.93
45° S 345.70 345.66 345.18 345.00 344.79 344.73 344.95 345.53
30° S 348.27 348.12 347.84 347.66 347.41 347.38 347.53 347.79
15° S 349.75 349.66 349.11 349.00 348.99 348.85 348.85 349.49
0° 350.85 350.86 350.33 350.22 350.30 350.12 350.12 350.66
15° N 351.45 351.36 350.99 350.74 350.75 350.75 351.85 351.27
30° N 352.38 352.07 351.68 351.70 351.62 351.62 351.55 351.90
45° N 352.63 352.52 352.23 352.11 352.04 351.90 352.01 352.27
Fig. 9. Annual statistics for moon-based earth observation effective coverage 60° N 352.63 352.18 352.22 352.19 352.36 352.32 352.27 352.19
from 1960 to 2050. Max refers to the maximum value of C in a certain year. 75° N 353.79 354.27 353.97 353.73 353.55 353.55 353.78 353.81
Min refers to the minimum value, and average refers to the average value. The
STD refers to the STD value of C in a year.

Fig. 11. Visible spans of different points on the 0° meridian in 2015.

Fig. 10. Visible spans of different points on the equator in January, 2015. The
average visible spans of each day for the four longitudes are 333.71, 333.71,
334.52, and 332.74 min.
earth that can be actually covered by a moon-based sensor. First,
we consider the visibility of a given earth position. We define
the coordinates of the lunar observatory Om (xM , yM , zM ), the
sun Os (xS , yS , zS ), and the target on the earth T (xT , yT , zT ),
so that the visibility of the target could be derived as
on any given date. However, the whole variation trends and the
average value are close to each other. Thus, the visible spans of
more points in 2015 are compared. Table I shows the average
visible span of different points on earth for 2015, by latitude.
Average visible spans vary between 323 and 354 min. At the
same latitude, visible spans are similar, especially over long pe-
riods. We, therefore, focus on the difference between latitudes,
and ignore the effect of the longitudes.
Fig. 11 shows the variation of the visible span of different
  points on the 0° meridian in 2015. Obviously, the visible spans
xM xT + yM yT + zM zT of different latitudes vary considerably, especially in a given
α = arccos  2 2 + z 2 ) (x2 + y 2 + z 2 )
(17) month. For lower latitudes, the visible spans vary more stably,
(xM + yM M T T T
  with small differences between months, but for higher latitudes,
xT xS + yT yS + zT zS the visible spans vary more dramatically with larger monthly
β = arccos  2 (18) differences. For latitudes lower than 45°, the variation trends of
(xS + yS2 + zS2 ) (x2T + yT2 + zT2 )
the visible spans are relatively similar. For example, the max-
π π imum visible spans for the equator, 45°, 75° and the poles are
α< and β < . (19)
2 2 720, 875, 1440, and 1440 min. Although the visible spans vary
If the conditions of (19) are met, the target is visible. Then, considerably over a month, their average values for different lat-
in order to determine the coverage condition of the target on the itudes are close, ranging from 320 to 365 min. Over the course
earth surface, we chose to calculate the visibility of points all of the year 2015, the visible span becomes larger from South to
over the earth’s surface with intervals of 15° latitude and 45° North.
longitude every 5 min in the year 2015. In addition, we determined the numbers of repeated observa-
We define the total daily visible time as visible span. tions for different points in year 2015. The difference of repeated
Fig. 10 shows that the visible spans of different points of various observations between longitudes is still very small, so the dif-
longitudes on the equator are similar. Since the longitudes of the ference between the latitudes was analyzed. For latitudes from
points are different, there is little difference in the visible span 60 °S to 60 °N, the numbers of repeated observations are indeed
2438 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 10, NO. 6, JUNE 2017

TABLE II
EFFECTIVE COVERAGE OF THE LUNAR CENTER AND LUNAR 0 °E, 0 °N FROM JAN. 1 TO JAN. 14 IN 2016

Date Jan. 1 Jan. 2 Jan. 3 Jan. 4 Jan. 5 Jan. 6 Jan. 7 Jan. 8 Jan. 9 Jan. 10

C 0.426135 0.486189 0.546026 0.60611 0.666885 0.728728 0.791902 0.856432 0.921511 0.974045
CL 0.426185 0.486207 0.54601 0.606061 0.666804 0.728618 0.791768 0.856277 0.921334 0.973874

similar with the most 358 times at the equator and the least 345
times at 60 °N. However, at higher latitudes, the numbers de-
crease dramatically, with possible observations only 181 times
at 75 °N and 185 times at 75 °S, and at the two poles only 7
times. This means that the continuous observation time is longer
at higher latitudes and the number of repeated observations be-
comes smaller with higher latitudes.
It is also doubtful that the analysis results regarding effective
coverage for the center of the moon are reflective of the results
for an observatory on the lunar surface. As a platform, the moon
is different from artificial satellites, since it has libration. This
brings the small drift of the relative attitude between the earth
and moon into consideration. With the help of JPL ephemeris Fig. 12. Effective coverage accumulation histogram of different observatory
and (2)–(4), the certain positions on the lunar surface can be de- points at 60 °E on the moon in March, 2015. The five colors correspond to five
rived. Here, we calculate the effective coverage of the lunar 0 °E, latitudes and the height of the each color’s column separately corresponds to the
effective coverage. The average values of each point are 0.336, 0.465, 0.465,
0 °N observation point for instance and compare the difference 0.429, and 0.292.
between the lunar surface and lunar center results.
Owing to the small difference in long-term values, ten days of
2016 were chosen for the example. The comparison is presented
in Table II, in which C represents the effective coverage of the
lunar center and CL represents that of lunar 0 °E, 0 °N. It is clear
that the difference between the two is small and both locations
yield nearly the same results.
For more detailed analysis, statistical data between C and CL
were calculated from 1960 to 2050. The correlation coefficient
was 1.0000, and the root mean square error was 0.0001, which
are values indicative of the high similarity. As a result, we
deemed it suitable to make use of C to estimate CL and reveal
the potential characteristics.
Furthermore, when using the simulation system to obtain
the coverage images of moon-based earth observations from
different positions on the moon, we found that, sometimes, part
of the earth was sheltered and could not be seen. In order to
determine the effect of the lunar observatory’s position on the
coverage, more positions on the moon were analyzed. From Fig. 13. Average effective coverage which could be achieved by different
Fig. 5, it is clear that when ∠Bm Om M1 and ∠Bm Om M2 are lunar surface positions’ observatories in 2015. The graticules are the longitudes
and latitudes of lunar surface. Five colors correspond to five ranges of average
larger than 90°, the lunar observatory could not observe the effective coverage, ranging from 0.084 to 0.493. Almost 75% area of the near
whole near side of the earth. Meanwhile, owing to the small side of the moon has the same effective coverage value, 0.49.
observation field angle, we ignore the condition that part of the
earth is sheltered for simplification, considering that as a bad
observation case. We calculated a series of points’ coverages at Based on the mass calculation, if the line of sight (LOS) is never
intervals of 1° latitude and 1° longitude for every day in 2015, blocked, the average effective coverages of different points in
ranging from 90 °S to 90 °N and 90 °W to 90 °E at the near a month are the same. There is really little difference between
side of the moon. Based on the calculation results, the coverage them in a certain day, which are essentially the same, with a
variation of a series of points at 60 °E in March is presented as a difference of <0.001.
typical example in Fig. 12. The average effective coverages are We then calculated the average effective coverage from dif-
the same for the latitudes of 70 °S and 0°, while the effective ferent lunar observatories in 2015 and the result is shown in
coverages of the other three latitudes are sometimes zero, since, Fig. 13. It is obvious that the center area could be able to
especially at higher latitudes, earth is occasionally not visible. achieve the highest coverage and that coverage decreases with
REN et al.: SIMULATION STUDY OF GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS AND COVERAGE FOR MOON-BASED EARTH OBSERVATION
increasing latitudes and longitudes. For the points on the zero
meridian with latitudes less than 81°, they are able to get the
maximum average effective coverage of 0.492. However, for
certain locations where the latitudes or longitudes are larger
than 69°, the obtained average effective coverages are less than
0.4, showing a distinct difference from the center area. Espe-
cially for the points with latitudes or longitudes larger than 84°,
the LOS is always blocked for some time during the year, lead-
ing to a dramatic decline of the effective coverages. For these
points, the average effective coverages are all less than 0.41 in
2015. The effective coverages of different points on the lunar
surface in the long term show approximate rotational symmetry
with the symcenter of 0 °E, 0 °N, such as the coverage of 60 °E,
40 °N being similar to that of 60 °W, 40 °S.
With the rapid development of lunar exploration projects,
there is increasing concern about the site selection of a possible
lunar base. Some researchers consider the far side of the moon
as the ideal position, owing to the cosmic environment and ex-
trasolar observation [31], [32]. Some scholars suggest the polar
regions of the moon as ideal locations on account of resources,
lunar exploration, and illumination conditions [33], [34]. Some
scientists proposed to set up the lunar base at the equator of
moon because of the lunar environment and temperature vari-
ation [35]. However, our results suggest that, at least for the
purpose of earth observation, the far side and polar regions of
the moon are not good choices. To some extent, the regions
with low latitudes and longitudes are suggested for the potential
lunar base sites if the main consideration is earth observation
coverage.
IV. CONCLUSION
In this paper, in consideration of the demand for space obser-
vations of large-scale geoscience phenomena, we utilized JPL
ephemerides data and reference system transformations to de-
velop a moon-based earth observation simulation system and
used this system to obtain several groups of simulated observa-
tion images. Results showed that the moon-based earth obser-
vation situation will change over time, but the visible situation
on a given day changes slowly and smoothly with the potential
for continuous observations over a long period of time. A lunar
observatory could provide for global-scale observations, which
would help us to study some specific characteristics and govern-
ing laws of long-term and large-scale geoscience phenomena,
thus, deepening our understanding of the earth.
In addition, we established a simplified geometrical model
and analyzed its optical geometrical characteristics. Sublunar
points were selected for further exploration on account of their
particularity. The time series smoothly covered all longitudes,
and the variation of latitudes and longitudes approximately fol-
lowed certain rules with a one-month period over the course of
a year. In the long-term, the maximum values of northern and
southern latitudes varied between 18.5° and 28.7°. A distinct
period of latitudinal variation was detected, with a period of
approximately 18.5 years, and the imaging pace should be well
arranged to avoid serious geometrical distortion.
2439
Based on the simulation system and the simplified geometri-
cal model, the effective coverage was calculated and analyzed.
On the scale of months, the effective coverage showed a period
of a sidereal month with little difference between each month,
and values ranged from 0 to 1. In the scale of years, the effective
coverage did not show any particular period; it was very stable
between years, thus, indicating that there is no direct correlation
between coverage and the movement of sublunar points. The
average value of effective coverage was 0.500, which reveals
rather good coverage of the earth. Furthermore, the visibili-
ties and number of repeated observations of different points
on earth’s surface are calculated. The visible spans of various
longitudes at the same latitude are similar. However, they vary
at different latitudes, especially higher latitudes. The average
visible span per day ranges from 320 to 365 min in year 2015.
Similarly, the difference of repeated observation times between
longitudes is still very small and the difference between latitudes
is more distinct, especially at higher latitudes. In 2015, the re-
peated observation times of different positions vary between 7
and 358. We also consider the effect of different positions for
lunar observatories on the coverage. The greatest difference is
that the LOS is sometimes blocked, especially for observatory
locations at latitudes or longitudes larger than 84°. If the earth
is never sheltered, the effective coverages of those positions are
nearly the same. In addition, the effective coverages of different
points on the lunar surface in the long term show approximate
rotational symmetry.
In conclusion, as a consequence of the geometrical charac-
teristics between the sun, earth, and moon, the moon repre-
sents a special platform that can be used to observe large-scale
geoscience phenomena. This investigation suggests that moon-
based earth observations would be advantageous in terms of
the wide swaths, continuous observation capabilities, and large
effective coverages, which could contribute to monitoring ef-
forts and deepen our understanding of large-scale geoscience
phenomena. In future work, a more precise geometrical model
will be required for further analyses and we are looking forward
to studying more geometrical parameters for moon-based earth
observations.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Gottschalck, P. E. Roundy, C. J. Schreck III, A. Vintzileos, and C.
Zhang, “Large-Scale atmospheric and oceanic conditions during the 2011–
12 DYNAMO field campaign,” Mon. Weather Rev., vol. 141, no. 12,
pp. 4173–4196, Dec. 2013.
[2] H. Guo, G. Liu, Y. Ding, and D. Zhang, “Conceptual research of lunar-
based earth observation for global environmental change,” in Proc. 39th
COSPAR Sci. Assembly, 2012, vol. 39. paper no. 684.
[3] G. Fornaro, G. Franceschetti, F. Lombardini, A. Mori, and M. Calamia,
“Potentials and limitations of Moon-Borne SAR imaging,” IEEE Trans.
Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 3009–3019, Jul. 2010.
[4] Y. Zheng, Z. Ouyang, C. Li, J. Liu, and Y. Zou, “China’s Lunar Explo-
ration Program: Present and future,” Planet. Space Sci., vol. 56, no. 7,
pp. 881–886, 2008.
[5] R. Vondrak, J. Keller, G. Chin, and J. Garvin, “Lunar reconnaissance
orbiter (LRO): Observations for lunar exploration and science,” Space
Sci. Rev., vol. 150, no. 1–4, pp. 7–22, Jan. 2010.
[6] I. A. Crawford et al., “Back to the Moon: The scientific rationale for
resuming lunar surface exploration,” Planetary Space Sci., vol. 74, no. 1,
pp. 3–14, 2012.
2440 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 10, NO. 6, JUNE 2017
[7] D. R. Li, Q. X. Tong, R. X. Li, J. Y. Gong, and L. P. Zhang, “Current
issues in high-resolution earth observation technology,” Sci. China Earth
Sci., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1043–1051, Jul. 2012.
[8] H. D. Guo et al. “Research on global change scientific satellites,” Sci.
China Earth Sci., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 204–215, Feb. 2014.
[9] J. R. Johnson, P. G. Lucey, T. C. Stone, and M. I. Staid, “Visible/Near-
Infrared remote sensing of earth from the moon,” NASA Advisory
Council Workshop on Science Associated with the Lunar Explo-
ration Architecture White Papers, 2007. [Online]. Available: http://www.
lpi.usra.edu/meetings/LEA/whitepapers/Johnson_etal_v02.pdf
[10] H. Guo, “Space-based observation for sensitive factors of global change,”
Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 226–228, 2009.
[11] E. Pallé and P. R. Goode, “The lunar terrestrial observatory: Observing
the Earth using photometers on the moon’s surface,” Adv. Space Res.,
vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 1083–1089, 2009.
[12] A. Moccia and A. Renga, “Synthetic aperture radar for earth observation
from a lunar base: Performance and potential applications,” IEEE Trans.
Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 1034–1051, Jul. 2010.
[13] D. Zhang, Study on Methodology of Lunar-Based Earth Observation for
Global Change. Shanghai, China: East China Normal University, 2012.
[14] H. D. Guo, Y. X. Ding, G. Liu, D. W. Zhang, W. X. Fu, and L. Zhang,
“Conceptual study of lunar-based SAR for global change monitoring,”
Sci. China Earth Sci., vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 1771–1779, 2014.
[15] Y. Ding, “Moonborne earth observation synthetic aperture radar and its
application in global change,” Ph.D. dissertation, signal and information
processing, Inst. Electron., Chin. Academy Sci., Beijing, China, 2014.
[16] Y. Ren et al., “Simulation of moon-based observation for large-scale earth
science phenomena,” in Proc. Int. Geosci. Remote Sens. Symp., 2016,
pp. 6253–6256.
[17] H. Ye, H. Guo, G. Liu, Y. Ren, Y. Ding, and M. Lv, “Coverage analysis
on global change sensitive regions from lunar based observation,” in Proc.
Int. Geosci. Remote Sens. Symp., 2016, pp. 3734–3737.
[18] Y. Ren et al., “Moon-based visibility analysis for the observation of
‘the belt and road,”’ IOP Con. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 46, no. 1,
pp. 012049, 2016.
[19] W. M. Folkner, J. G. Williams, and D. H. Boggs, “The planetary and lunar
ephemeris DE 421,” Interplanetary Netw. Progress Rep. 42-178, vol. 5,
pp. 1–34, 2009.
[20] W. M. Folkner, J. G. Williams, D. H. Boggs, R. S. Park, and P. Kuchynka,
The Planetary and Lunar Ephemerides DE430 and DE431, Interplanetary
Netw. Progress Rep. 42-196, vol. 196. pp. 8–11, 2014.
[21] S. A. Hall, J. A. Hoffman, and D. Candidate, “Determination of shadowing
on the lunar surface using a lunar-celestial equatorial coordinate system,”
in Proc. 44th Int. Conf. Environ. Syst., 2014, pp. 1–6.
[22] P. Gérard and B. Luzum, IERS Conventions (2010). Sèvres, France: Bureau
Int. des poids et mesures, 2010, pp. 1–179.
[23] B. A. Archinal et al., “Report of the IAU working group on cartographic
coordinates and rotational elements: 2009,” Celestial Mech. Dyn. Astron-
omy, vol. 109, no. 2, pp. 101–135, Feb. 2011.
[24] D. Chun, J. Yeon, D. Han, J. Heon, and H. Suk, “Kompsat-2 direct sensor
modeling and geometric calibration / validation,” Int. Soc. Photogramm.
Remote Sens., vol. 37, pp. 47–51, 2008.
[25] J. Takaku and T. Tadono, “PRISM on-orbit geometric calibration and
DSM performance,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 47, no. 12,
pp. 4060–4073, Dec. 2009.
[26] Y. Zhang, M. Zheng, J. Xiong, Y. Lu, and X. Xiong, “On-orbit geometric
calibration of ZY-3 three-line array imagery with multistrip data sets,”
IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 224–234, Jan. 2014.
[27] S. K. Lee, R. Atlas, D. Enfield, C. Wang, and H. Liu, “Is there an opti-
mal ENSO pattern that enhances large-scale atmospheric processes con-
ducive to tornado outbreaks in the United States?,” J. Clim., vol. 26, no. 5,
pp. 1626–1642, Mar. 2013.
[28] A. Otto et al., “Energy budget constraints on climate response,” Nat.
Geosci., vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 415–416, May 2013.
[29] R. Seager, N. Naik, and G. A. Vecchi, “Thermodynamic and dynamic
mechanisms for large-scale changes in the hydrological cycle in response
to global warming,” J. Clim., vol. 23, no. 17, pp. 4651–4668, Sep. 2010.
[30] L. Zhou et al., “Development of an atom gravimeter and status of the
10-meter atom interferometer for precision gravity measurement,” Gen.
Relativity Gravitation, vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 1931–1942, Jul. 2011.
[31] M. Kayton, “Engineering of an observatory on the far side of the moon,”
IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 23, no. 6, p. 84982, Jun. 2008.
[32] M. Strojnik and M. K. Scholl, “Extrasolar planet observatory on the
far side of the moon,” J. Appl. Remote Sens., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 84982,
Jun. 2014.
[33] M. Lemelin, D. M. Blair, C. E. Roberts, K. D. Runyon, D. Nowka, and D.
A. Kring, “High-priority lunar landing sites for in situ and sample return
studies of polar volatiles,” Planet. Space Sci., vol. 101, pp. 149–161,
Oct. 2014.
[34] E. Detsis, O. Doule, and A. Ebrahimi, “Location selection and layout
for LB10, a lunar base at the Lunar North Pole with a liquid mirror
observatory,” Acta Astronaut., vol. 85, pp. 61–72, Apr. 2013.
[35] R. B. Malla and K. M. Brown, “Determination of temperature variation
on lunar surface and subsurface for habitat analysis and design,” Acta
Astronaut., vol. 107, pp. 196–207, Feb. 2015.
Yuanzhen Ren was born in Jiaozuo, Henan Province,
China, in 1990. He received the Graduate degree in
geographical information system in 2013 from the
Nanjing University, Nanjing, China. Since September
2015, he has been working toward the Ph.D. degree
in the Department of Geographical Information Sys-
tem, Institute of Remote Sensing and Digital Earth,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, and
the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Bei-
jing, China.
His current research activities deal with the geo-
metrical characteristics of moon-based earth observation platform.
Huadong Guo (M’12) received the Graduate degree
in geology from the Department of Geology , Nanjing
University, Nanjing, China, in 1977 and the M.Sc.
degree in geographical information system from the
Graduate University of the Chinese Academy of Sci-
ence (CAS), Beijing, China, in 1981.
He was project leader of more than ten key pro-
grams related to earth observation. For the past 10
years and at present, he was and is one of the principal
investigators for SIR-C/X-SAR, JERS-1 SAR, ERS-
1/2 SAR, Radarsat-1/2, Envisat, SRTM, and ALOS
programs. He has published more than 200 papers and 17 books.
Dr. Guo is a member of the International SAR Working Group, Chairman
of the associate on Environment Remote Sensing of China, secretary general of
the International Society for Digital Earth, Editor-in-Chief of the International
Journal of Digital Earth, member of CoDATA executive committee, and Guest
Professor of seven Universities in China. He was the Principal Scientist of the
Expert Group for Information Acquisition and Processing Technology, National
High-tech Research and Development Program in China from 1996 to 2000. He
received three national awards on science and technology, and nine awards by
the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Guang Liu (M’14) received the B.S. and M.S. de-
grees in physics from Tsinghua University, Beijing,
China, in 1999 and 2002, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree in geographical information system from the
Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese
Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing, China, in 2008.
From 2006 to 2007, he visited the Mathemat-
ical Geodesy and Positioning, Delft University of
Technology, Delft, The Netherlands, as a Guest Re-
searcher and worked on the time series analysis of
Phased Array type L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar
(PALSAR) data. He is currently an Associate Professor in the Institute of
Remote Sensing and Digital Earth, CAS. His interest is focused on the
study of feasibility and potential applications of synthetic aperture radar im-
age time series analysis and moon-based earth observation conceptual stud-
ies, and most of his work are satellite and moon-based SAR interferometric
technique.
Hanlin Ye (S’15) received the Bachelor’s degree in
geographic information system from Nanjing Uni-
versity Jinling College, Nanjing, China, in 2014. He
is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree in ge-
ographical information system in the Institute of Re-
mote Sensing and Digital Earth, Chinese academy of
sciences, Beijing, China.
His general interests are in the areas of remote
sensing, spatial analysis, and digital image process-
ing. He is now doing research on the observation
geometry from moon-based platform.