Parameter calibration and uncertainty analysis for snow depths from the NASA Eulerian Snow On Sea Ice Model and derived sea ice thickness from ICESat-2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Snow on Arctic sea ice plays many, sometimes contrasting roles in Arctic climate feedbacks. During the sea ice growth season, the presence of snow on sea ice can enhance ice growth by increasing the sea ice albedo, or conversely, inhibit sea ice growth by insulating the ice from the cold atmosphere. Furthermore, estimates of snow depth on Arctic sea ice are also a key input for deriving sea ice thickness from altimetry measurements, such as satellite lidar altimetry measurements from ICESat-2. Due to the logistical challenges of making measurements in as remote a region as the Arctic, snow depth on Arctic sea ice is difficult to observationally constrain. The NASA Eulerian Snow On Sea Ice Model (NESOSIM) can be used to provide snow depth and density estimates over Arctic sea ice with pan-Arctic coverage within a relatively simple framework. The latest version of NESOSIM, version 1.1, is a 2-layer model with simple representations of the processes of accumulation, wind packing, loss due to blowing snow, and redistribution due to sea ice motion. Relative to version 1.0, NESOSIM 1.1 features an extended model domain, and reanalysis snowfall input scaled to observed snowfall retrieved from CloudSat satellite radar reflectivity measurements. In this work, we present a systematic calibration, and an accompanying estimate in the uncertainty of the free parameters in NESOSIM, targeting airborne snow radar measurements from Operation IceBridge. We further investigate uncertainties in snow depth and the resulting uncertainties in derived sea ice thickness from ICESat-2 altimetry measurements using NESOSIM snow depths.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".