MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082173851 · doi:10.3189/2013jog12j138

A new semi-automatic approach for dividing glacier complexes into individual glaciers

2013· article· en· W2082173851 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christian Kienholz, Regine Hock, A. A. Arendt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Glaciology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGlacierIce fieldGeologyDigital elevation modelArcticGlacier morphologyThe arcticElevation (ballistics)Physical geographyGlaciologyGeomorphologyClimatologyRemote sensingArctic ice packOceanographyAntarctic sea iceGeographyPaleontologyGeometryStratigraphyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many glaciological and hydrological studies require outlines of individual glaciers rather than total ice cover. Here we develop a new semiautomatic algorithm that uses a digital elevation model (DEM) and outlines of glacier complexes to calculate the extents of individual glaciers. The algorithm first applies hydrological modeling tools to a modified DEM to calculate flowsheds. It then merges flowsheds that belong to individual glaciers using a distance-based approach, whose required empirical parameters are derived from the Juneau Icefield area in Alaska. In this region, 2% of ∼1300 glaciers were misclassified. The algorithm was validated on >25 000 km 2 of ice in other regions in Alaska and on >40 000 km 2 of ice in Arctic Canada, resulting in ∼2% and ∼3% misclassified glaciers, respectively. Results indicate that the algorithm is robust provided the DEM and the outlines are of good quality.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations48
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of GlaciologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207