MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001891843 · doi:10.3189/172756411795931615

Evaluation of a polynya flux model by means of thermal infrared satellite estimates

2011· article· en· W2001891843 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Krumpen, Sascha Willmes, M. Á. Morales Maqueda, Christian Haas, Jens Hölemann, Rüdiger Gerdes, David Schröder

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Glaciology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversität BremenBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungEuropean Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSatelliteGeologyModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerThermal infraredFlux (metallurgy)ClimatologyInfrared

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We test the ability of a two-dimensional flux model to simulate polynya events with narrow open-water zones by comparing model results to ice-thickness and ice-production estimates derived from thermal infrared Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) observations in conjunction with an atmospheric dataset. Given a polynya boundary and an atmospheric dataset, the model correctly reproduces the shape of an 11 day long event, using only a few simple conservation laws. Ice production is slightly overestimated by the model, owing to an underestimated ice thickness. We achieved best model results with the consolidation thickness parameterization developed by Biggs and others (2000). Observed regional discrepancies between model and satellite estimates might be a consequence of the missing representation of the dynamic of the thin-ice thickening (e.g. rafting). We conclude that this simplified polynya model is a valuable tool for studying polynya dynamics and estimating associated fluxes of single polynya events.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.195 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of GlaciologySame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207