High-Resolution Snow Depth on Arctic Sea Ice From Low-Altitude Airborne Microwave Radar Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present new high-resolution snow depth data on Arctic sea ice derived from airborne microwave radar measurements from the IceBird campaigns of the Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI) together with a new retrieval method using signal peakiness based on an intercomparison exercise of colocated data at different altitudes. We aim to demonstrate the capabilities and potential improvements of radar data, which were acquired at a lower altitude (200 ft) and slower speed (110 kn) and had a smaller radar footprint size (2-m diameter) than previous airborne snow radar data. So far, AWI Snow Radar data have been derived using a 2–18-GHz ultrawideband frequency-modulated continuous-wave (FMCW) radar in 2017–2019. Our results show that our method in combination with thorough calibration through coherent noise removal and system response deconvolution significantly improves the quality of the radar-derived snow depth data. The validation against a 2-D grid of <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">in situ</i> snow depth measurements on level landfast first-year ice indicates a mean bias of only 0.86 cm between radar and ground truth. Comparison between the radar-derived snow depth estimates from different altitudes shows good consistency. We conclude that the AWI Snow Radar aboard the IceBird campaigns is able to measure the snow depth on Arctic sea ice accurately at higher spatial resolution than but consistent with the existing airborne snow radar data of NASA Operation IceBridge. Together with the simultaneous measurements of the total ice thickness and surface freeboard, the IceBird campaign data will be able to describe the whole sea-ice column on regional scales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".