MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1499602468 · doi:10.1002/hyp.10255

C‐band backscatter from a complexly‐layered snow cover on first‐year sea ice

2014· article· en· W1499602468 on OpenAlexafffundabout
M. Christopher Fuller, Torsten Geldsetzer, Jagvijay P. S. Gill, John Yackel, Chris Derksen

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Space AgencyCanadian Nuclear Safety CommissionArcticNet
KeywordsSnowSea iceBackscatter (email)ScatterometerSea ice thicknessGeologySnow fieldSea ice concentrationSnow coverRemote sensingCryosphereEnvironmental scienceClimatologyOceanographyGeomorphologyWind speed

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a case study of observed and modelled C‐band microwave backscatter signatures for a complexly‐layered snow cover on smooth, land‐fast, first‐year sea ice. We investigate how complexly‐layered snow affects the backscatter, by comparing signatures with those for a simple snow cover, and through model sensitivity analysis. Backscatter signatures are obtained using a surface‐based scatterometer, on sea ice in Hudson Bay, Canada. Coincident in situ snow and ice geophysical measurements, and on‐ice meteorological observations, describe the snow cover formation and structure. A multilayer snow and ice backscatter model is used to iteratively add and subtract components of the complex snow cover to assess their impacts on the overall backscatter. For incidence angles between 20° and 70°, the backscatter from a complex snow cover on smooth first‐year sea ice is significantly higher than backscatter from a simple snow cover on similar sea ice. Sensitivity analysis suggests that rough ice layers formed within the complex snow cover and those superimposed at the sea ice interface are the physical mechanisms that affect an increase in surface and volume backscattering. This has implications for sea ice mapping, geophysical inversion and snow thickness studies. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207