CryoSat-2 delivers monthly and inter-annual surface elevation change for Arctic ice caps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We show that the CryoSat-2 radar altimeter can provide useful estimates of surface elevation change on a variety of Arctic ice caps, on both monthly and yearly timescales. Changing conditions, however, can lead to a varying bias between the elevation estimated from the radar altimeter and the physical surface due to changes in the ratio of subsurface to surface backscatter. Under melting conditions the radar returns are predominantly from the surface so that if surface melt is extensive across the ice cap estimates of summer elevation loss can be made with the frequent coverage provided by CryoSat-2. For example, the average summer elevation decreases on the Barnes Ice Cap, Baffin Island, Canada were 2.05 ± 0.36 m (2011), 2.55 ± 0.32 m (2012), 1.38 ± 0.40 m (2013) and 1.44 ± 0.37 m (2014), losses which were not balanced by the winter snow accumulation. As winter-to-winter conditions were similar, the net elevation losses were 1.0 ± 0.20 m (winter 2010/11 to winter 2011/12), 1.39 ± 0.20 m (2011/12 to 2012/13) and 0.36 ± 0.20 m (2012/13 to 2013/14); for a total surface elevation loss of 2.75 ± 0.20 m over this 3-year period. In contrast, the uncertainty in height change from Devon Ice Cap, Canada, and Austfonna, Svalbard, can be up to twice as large because of the presence of firn and the possibility of a varying bias between the true surface and the detected elevation due to changing year-to-year conditions. Nevertheless, the surface elevation change estimates from CryoSat for both ice caps are consistent with field and meteorological measurements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".