Estimation of Melt Pond Fractions on First Year Sea Ice Using Compact Polarization SAR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Melt ponds are a common feature on Arctic sea ice. They are linked to the sea ice surface albedo and transmittance of energy to the ocean from the atmosphere and thus constitute an important process to parameterize in Arctic climate models and simulations. This paper presents a first attempt to retrieve the melt pond fraction from hybrid‐polarized compact polarization (CP) SAR imagery, which has wider swath and shorter revisit time than the quad‐polarization systems, e.g., from RADARSAT‐2 (RS‐2). The co‐polarization (co‐pol) ratio has been verified to provide estimates of melt pond fractions. However, it is a challenge to link CP parameters and the co‐pol ratio. The theoretical possibility is presented, for making this linkage with the CP parameter C22/C11 (the ratio between the elements of the coherence matrix of CP SAR) for melt pond detection and monitoring with the tilted‐Bragg scattering model for the ocean surface. The empirical transformed formulation, denoted as the “compact polarization and quad‐pol” (“CPQP”) model, is proposed, based on 2062 RS‐2 quad‐pol SAR images, collocated with in situ measurements. We compared the retrieved melt pond fraction with CP parameters simulated from quad‐pol SAR data with results retrieved from the co‐pol ratio from quad‐pol SAR observations acquired during the Arctic‐Ice (Arctic‐Ice Covered Ecosystem in a Rapidly Changing Environment) field project. The results are shown to be comparable for observed melt pond measurements in spatial and temporal distributions. Thus, the utility of CP mode SAR for melt pond fraction estimation on first year level ice is presented.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".