MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001315270 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2020.2966880

Sea Ice Thickness Measurement Using Spaceborne GNSS-R: First Results With TechDemoSat-1 Data

2020· article· en· W3001315270 on OpenAlexafffund
Qingyun Yan, Weimin Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundOcean Frontier Institute
KeywordsRemote sensingReflectometryEnvironmental scienceSatelliteSurface roughnessReference dataSpecular reflectionReflection (computer programming)Sea iceRoot mean squareMeteorologyGeologyComputer scienceOpticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, an effective schematic is developed for estimating sea ice thickness (SIT) from the reflectivity (Γ) produced with TechDemoSat-1 (TDS-1) Global Navigation Satellite System-Reflectometry data. Here, Γ is formulated as the product of the propagation loss due to SIT and the reflection coefficient of underlying seawater. The effect of surface roughness on Γ is neglected when only considering signals of coherent reflection. In practice, Γ at the specular point is first generated using TDS-1 data. Afterwards, SIT is calculated from TDS-1 Γ based on the proposed reflectivity model, and verified with two sets of reference SIT data; one is obtained by the Soil Moisture Ocean Salinity (SMOS) satellite, and the other is the combined SMOS/Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) measurements. This analysis is performed on the data with SIT less than 1m. Through comparison, good consistency between the derived TDS-1 SIT and the reference SIT is obtained, with a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.84 and a root-mean-square difference (RMSD) of 9.39 cm with SMOS, and an r of 0.67 and an RMSD of 9.49 cm with SMOS/SMAP, which demonstrates the applicability of the developed model and the utility of TDS-1 data for SIT estimation. In addition, this method is proved to be useful for improving existing sea ice detection accuracy.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Citations71
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207