Deriving Snow Depth From ICESat-2 Lidar Multiple Scattering Measurements: Uncertainty Analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The application of diffusion theory and Monte Carlo lidar radiative transfer simulations presented in Part I of this series of study suggests that snow depth can be derived from the first-, second- and third-order moments of the lidar backscattering pathlength distribution. These methods are now applied to the satellite ICESat-2 lidar measurements over the Arctic sea ice and land surfaces of Northern Hemisphere. Over the Arctic sea ice, the ICESat-2 retrieved snow depths agree well with co-located IceBridge snow radar measured values with a root-mean-square (RMS) difference of 7.8 cm or 29.2% of the mean snow depth. The terrestrial snow depths derived from ICESat-2 show drastic spatial variation of the snowpack along ICESat-2 ground tracks over the Northern Hemisphere, which are consistent with the University of Arizona (UA) and Canadian Meteorological Centre (CMC) gridded daily snow products. The RMS difference in snow depths between ICESat-2 and UA gridded daily snow products is 14 cm, or 28% of the mean UA snow depth. To better understand these results, we also discuss the possible sources of errors in ICESat-2 derived snow depths, including surface roughness within the laser footprint, atmospheric forward scattering, solar background noise, and detector dark current. Simulation results indicate that the snow depth errors would be less than 5 cm if the standard deviation of pulse spreading due to surface roughness is within 50 cm. Our results demonstrate that the ICESat-2 lidar measurements can be used to reliably derive snow depth, which is a critical geophysical parameter for cryosphere studies including sea ice thickness estimation and also provides important constraints in the modeling of terrestrial hydrological processes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".