MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3010263132 · doi:10.5194/tc-2020-283

Evaluating Airborne Ku-Band Radar Altimetry over LandfastFirst-Year Sea Ice

2020· article· en· W3010263132 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Donchenko, Joshua King, Richard Kelly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEurostarsRES’EAU-WaterNETCanadian Space AgencyEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsSnowAltimeterRadar altimeterSnowpackGeologyElevation (ballistics)Remote sensingRadarSea ice thicknessSea iceEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeodesyArctic ice packClimatologyGeomorphologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Recent studies have challenged the assumption that Ku-band radar used by the CryoSat-2 altimeter fully penetrates the dry snow cover of Arctic sea ice. There is also uncertainty around the proper technique for handling retracker threshold selection in the Threshold First-Maxima Retracker (TFMRA) method which estimates the ice surface elevation from the radar echo waveform. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and penetration of the TFMRA retracking method applied to the Airborne Synthetic Aperture Radar and Interferometric Radar Altimeter System (ASIRAS), an airborne simulator of the CryoSat-2, to investigate the effect of surface characteristics and improve accuracy. The ice surface elevation estimate from ASIRAS was evaluated by comparing to the snow surface measured by aggregating laser altimetry observations from the Airborne Laser Scanner (ALS), and the ice surface measured by subtracting ground observations of snow depth from the snow surface. The perceived penetration of the ice surface estimate was found to increase with the retracker threshold and was correlated with the value of surface properties. The slope of the relationship between penetration and threshold was greater for a deformed ice surface, a rough snow surface, a deeper snow cover, an absence of salinity and a larger snow grain size. As a result, the ideal retracked threshold, one that would achieve 100 % penetration, varies depending on properties of the surface being observed. Under conditions such deep snow or a large grain size, the retracked elevation sr was found in some cases to not penetrate fully the snowpack. This would cause an overestimation of the sea ice freeboard and as a consequence, the sea ice thickness. Results suggest that using a single threshold with the TFMRA retracking method will not yield a reliable estimate of the snow-ice interface when observed over an area with diverse surface properties. However, there may be potential to improve the retracking method by incorporating knowledge of the sensed surface physical characteristics. This study shows that remotely sensed surface properties, such as the ice deformity or snow surface roughness, can be combined with the waveform shape to select an ideal retracker for individual returns with an additional offset to account for the incomplete penetration of Ku-band over appropriate surface characteristics.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→