Thin ice clouds in the Arctic: cloud optical depth and particle size retrieved from ground-based thermal infrared radiometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Multiband downwelling thermal measurements of zenith sky radiance, along with cloud boundary heights, were used in a retrieval algorithm to estimate cloud optical depth and effective particle diameter of thin ice clouds in the Canadian High Arctic. Ground-based thermal infrared (IR) radiances for 150 semitransparent ice clouds cases were acquired at the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) in Eureka, Nunavut, Canada (80° N, 86° W). We analyzed and quantified the sensitivity of downwelling thermal radiance to several cloud parameters including optical depth, effective particle diameter and shape, water vapor content, cloud geometric thickness and cloud base altitude. A lookup table retrieval method was used to successfully extract, through an optimal estimation method, cloud optical depth up to a maximum value of 2.6 and to separate thin ice clouds into two classes: (1) TIC1 clouds characterized by small crystals (effective particle diameter ≤ 30 µm), and (2) TIC2 clouds characterized by large ice crystals (effective particle diameter > 30 µm). The retrieval technique was validated using data from the Arctic High Spectral Resolution Lidar (AHSRL) and Millimeter Wave Cloud Radar (MMCR). Inversions were performed over three polar winters and results showed a significant correlation (R2 = 0.95) for cloud optical depth retrievals and an overall accuracy of 83 % for the classification of TIC1 and TIC2 clouds. A partial validation relative to an algorithm based on high spectral resolution downwelling IR radiance measurements between 8 and 21 µm was also performed. It confirms the robustness of the optical depth retrieval and the fact that the broadband thermal radiometer retrieval was sensitive to small particle (TIC1) sizes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".