Regional September Sea Ice Forecasting with Complex Networks and Gaussian Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Reliable predictions of the Arctic sea ice cover are becoming of paramount importance for Arctic communities and industry stakeholders. In this study pan-Arctic and regional September mean sea ice extents are forecast with lead times of up to 3 months using a complex network statistical approach. This method exploits relationships within climate time series data by constructing regions of spatiotemporal homogeneity (i.e., nodes), and subsequently deriving teleconnection links between them. Here the nodes and links of the networks are generated from monthly mean sea ice concentration fields in June, July, and August; hence, individual networks are constructed for each respective month. Network information is then utilized within a linear Gaussian process regression forecast model, a Bayesian inference technique, in order to generate predictions of sea ice extent. Pan-Arctic forecasts capture a significant amount of the variability in the satellite observations of September sea ice extent, with detrended predictive skills of 0.53, 0.62, and 0.81 at 3-, 2-, and 1-month lead times, respectively. Regional forecasts are also performed for nine Arctic regions. On average, the highest predictive skill is achieved in the Canadian Archipelago, Beaufort, Chukchi, East Siberian, Laptev, and Kara Seas, although the ability to accurately predict many of these regions appears to be changing over time.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".