A test of the Hapke photometric model

By M. Shepard, P. Helfenstein. 2007

180 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Mercury’s Weather-Beaten Surface: Understanding Mercury in the Context of Lunar and Asteroidal Space Weathering Studies (2014, result): “Although it has been demonstrated for physically characterized laboratory samples that many of the parameters in Hapke’s model represent a combination of physical properties (Shepard and Helfenstein 2007), it is still useful to compare modeling results between surfaces.”
A Review of Nonlinear Hyperspectral Unmixing Methods (2014, background): “refer to [41], [42], [45]–[57] and references therein for current developments involving the Hapke model.”
Resolved Hapke parameter maps of the Moon (2014, methodology): “…state properties (e.g., the surface roughness, grain size, and porosity) were examined with laboratory experiments and computer simulations [Cord et al., 2003; Piatek et al., 2004; Shkuratov et al., 2005; Shepard and Helfenstein, 2007], but clear casual correlations are not yet unequivocal.”
Wavelength dependence of dust aerosol single scattering albedo as observed by the Compact Reconnaissance Imaging Spectrometer (2009, background): “[61] Ultimately, there are no simple answers to the discrepancies that would avoid the scent of parochialism, i.e., ‘‘our way is the best.’’ Certainly, attempts to extract microphysical parameters using radiative transfer theory from surface observations are dubious at best [ Shepard and Helfenstein”