MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788849294 · doi:10.5194/tc-12-2211-2018

Greenland Ice Mapping Project: ice flow velocity variation at sub-monthly to decadal timescales

2018· article· en· W2788849294 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ian Joughin, Ben Smith, Ian M. Howat

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œcryosphere · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyCanadian Space AgencyU.S. Geological SurveyEuropean CommissionEuropean Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGlacierGreenland ice sheetGeologyGroenlandiaClimatologyIce sheetClimate changePhysical geographyOceanographyGeomorphologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe several new ice velocity maps produced by the Greenland Ice Mapping Project (GIMP) using Landsat 8 and Copernicus Sentinel 1A/B data. We then focus on several sites where we analyse these data in conjunction with earlier data from this project, which extend back to the year 2000. At Jakobshavn Isbrae and Koge Bugt, we find good agreement when comparing results from different sensors. In a change from recent behaviour, Jakobshavn Isbrae began slowing substantially in 2017, with a mid-summer peak that was even slower than some previous winter minimums. Over the last decade, we identify two major slowdown events at Koge Bugt that coincide with short-term advances of the terminus. We also examined populations of glaciers in northwest and southwest Greenland to produce a record of speedup since 2000. Collectively these glaciers continue to speed up, but there are regional differences in the timing of periods of peak speedup. In addition, we computed trends in winter flow speed for much of the southwest margin of the ice sheet and find little in the way of statistically significant change over the period covered by our data. Finally, although consistency of the data generally is good through time and across sensors, our analysis indicates substantial differences can arise in regions with high strain rates (e.g., shear margins) where sensor resolution can become a factor. For applications such as constraining model inversions, users should factor in the impact that the data's resolution has on their results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations133
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œcryosphereSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207