MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3083633786 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10920

Analysis of ice types along the northern coast of Ellesmere Island, Nunavut, Canada, and their relationship to Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) backscatter

2015· dissertation· en· W3083633786 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Miriam Richer McCallum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersArcticNet
KeywordsGeologySynthetic aperture radarSea iceBackscatter (email)IcebergRemote sensingOceanographyArctic ice packAntarctic sea iceGlaciologySea ice concentrationPhysical geographySea ice thicknessGeographyPaleontologyTectonicsStratigraphy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ice shelves and other ice features along the northern coast of Ellesmere Island are a complex mixture of ice originating from marine and meteoric sources.This is reflected in the considerable variability in Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) backscatter in remotely sensed imagery.This study analyzed the properties of three different ice types across the Milne and Petersen ice shelves and associated them with SAR backscatter.The results indicated that the grain diameter of each ice type was unique in horizontal thin sections and that bubble shape and size were associated with SAR variables.Furthermore, cores extracted from areas originally thought to be glacially-fed were identified as being marine in origin, suggesting that considerable surface ablation has taken place over the past three decades.This research offers the potential to improve our ability to assess long-term changes (past and future) of the ice cover along the northern coast of Ellesmere Island.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→