Oceanic eddy signature on SAR-derived sea ice drift and vorticity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the global ocean, mesoscale eddies are routinely observed from satellite observation. In the Arctic Ocean, however, their observation is impeded by the presence of sea ice, although there is a growing recognition that eddy may be important for the evolution of the sea ice cover. In this talk, we will present a new method of surface ocean eddy detection based on their signature in sea ice vorticity retrieved from Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images. A combination of Feature Tracking and Pattern Matching algorithm is used to compute the sea ice drift from pairs of SAR images. We will mostly focus on the case of one eddy in October 2017 in the marginal ice zone of the Canadian Basin, which was sampled by mooring observations, allowing a detailed description of its characteristics. Although the eddy could not be identified by visual inspection of the SAR images, its signature is revealed as a dipole anomaly in sea ice vorticity, which suggests that the eddy is a dipole composed of a cyclone and an anticyclone, with a horizontal scale of 80-100 km and persisted over a week. We will also discuss the relative contributions of the wind and the surface current to the sea ice vorticity. We anticipate that the robustness of our method will allow us to detect more eddies as more SAR observations become available in the future.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".