MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047096992 · doi:10.3390/rs12152486

Proof of Concept for Sea Ice Stage of Development Classification Using Deep Learning

2020· article· en· W3047096992 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ryan Kruk, M. Christopher Fuller, Alexander S. Komarov, Dustin Isleifson, Ian Jeffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea iceArtificial neural networkArcticCategorizationSynthetic aperture radarArctic ice packComputer scienceRemote sensingGeologyArtificial intelligenceClimatologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate maps of ice concentration and ice type are needed to address increased interest in commercial marine transportation through the Arctic. RADARSAT-2 SAR imagery is the primary source of data used by expert ice analysts at the Canadian Ice Service (CIS) to produce sea ice maps over the Canadian territory. This study serves as a proof of concept that neural networks can be used to accurately predict ice type from SAR data. Datasets of SAR images served as inputs, and CIS ice charts served as labelled outputs to train a neural network to classify sea ice type. Our results show that DenseNet achieves the highest overall classification accuracy of 94.0% including water and the highest ice classification accuracy of 91.8% on a three class dataset using a fusion of HH and HV SAR polarizations for the input samples. The 91.8% ice classification accuracy validates the premise that a neural network can be used to effectively categorize different ice types based on SAR data.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207