MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087760916 · doi:10.1029/2006jc003703

Investigations of newly formed sea ice in the Cape Bathurst polynya: 2. Microwave emission

2007· article· en· W2087760916 on OpenAlexaff
Byongjun Hwang, Jens K. Ehn, David G. Barber, R. J. Galley, Thomas C. Grenfell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapeGeologyOceanographySea iceMicrowaveCTDClimatologyArchaeologyGeographyTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the role of newly formed sea ice geophysical state on microwave emission. Coincident with sea ice geophysical sampling, ship‐based passive microwave emission data (dual‐polarized at 19, 37 and 85 GHz) were collected in the Cape Bathurst Polynya during 18 October and 13 November 2003. Using polarization ratios (PRs), we found that bare thin ice was separable from snow‐covered ice. Thin snow (equal to 0.02–0.13 m) thickness is significantly correlated with the spectral gradient ratios GRV(85,19) (R2 = 0.55, P‐value <0.05) and GRV(85,37) (R2 = 0.66, P‐value < 0.05), but not with GRV(37,19) (R2 = 0.19, P‐value > 0.2). The relationship between atmospherically corrected R37 and bare ice thickness showed an exponential relationship very comparable to that reported by Martin et al. [2004] , which is ascribed to the reduction of bare ice surface salinity based on both observational and modeling studies. However, the relationship quickly becomes invalid for even thin snow covered ice, due to significant impact of thin wet (liquid water fraction ∼0.02–0.04) snow on microwave emission. Our results suggest that the sea ice algorithms NASA Team and NASA Team 2 could underestimate total ice concentration over thin bare ice by 35% on average, while both algorithms underestimate the total ice concentration by 20% over snow‐covered ice. Using PR(85) sea ice could be delineated from open water using a properly adjusted threshold value accounting for cloud or fog effects, possibly with the exception of dark nilas and/or bare consolidated pancakes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations49
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207