The implications of selected processing methods on satellite altimetry derived sea ice thickness state and trends in the seasonal ice zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ice cover of the Arctic Ocean is increasingly becoming dominated by seasonal sea ice. It is important to focus on the processing of altimetry ice thickness data in thinner seasonal ice regions to understand seasonal sea ice behaviour better. This study focusses on Baffin Bay as a region of interest to study seasonal ice behaviour. We aim to reconcile the spring sea ice thickness derived from multiple satellite altimetry sensors and sea ice charts in Baffin Bay and produce a robust long-term record (2003-2020) for analysing trends in sea ice thickness. We investigate the impact of choosing different snow depth products (the Warren climatology, a passive microwave snow depth product and modelled snow depth from reanalysis data) and snow redistribution methods (a sigmoidal function and an empirical piecewise function) to retrieve sea ice thickness from satellite altimetry sea ice freeboard data. The choice of snow depth product and redistribution method results in an uncertainty envelope around the March mean sea ice thickness in Baffin Bay of 10%. Moreover, the sea ice thickness trend ranges from -15 cm/dec to 20 cm/dec depending on the applied snow depth product and redistribution method. Previous studies have shown a possible long-term asymmetrical trend in sea ice thinning in Baffin Bay. The present study shows that whether a significant long-term asymmetrical trend was found depends on the choice of snow depth product and redistribution method. The satellite altimetry sea ice thickness results with different snow depth products and snow redistribution methods show that different processing techniques can lead to different results and can influence conclusions on total and spatial sea ice thickness trends. Further processing work on the historic radar altimetry record is needed to create reliable sea ice thickness products in the marginal ice zone.
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 | 0.015 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".