MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226354511 · doi:10.1017/jog.2022.18

Sub-kilometre scale distribution of snow depth on Arctic sea ice from Soviet drifting stations

2022· article· en· W4226354511 on OpenAlexaff
Robbie Mallett, Julienne Strœve, Michel Tsamados, Rosemary Willatt, Thomas Newman, Vishnu Nandan, Jack Landy, Polona Itkin, Marc Oggier, Matthias Jaggi, Donald K. Perovich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Glaciology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKNuclear Safety and Security CommissionNorges ForskningsrådEuropean Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSnowTransectSea iceGeologySnow fieldArcticSea ice thicknessCryosphereAltimeterLidarArctic ice packClimatologyPhysical geographyRemote sensingOceanographyGeomorphologyGeographySnow cover

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The sub-kilometre scale distribution of snow depth on Arctic sea ice impacts atmosphere-ice fluxes of energy and mass, and is of importance for satellite estimates of sea-ice thickness from both radar and lidar altimeters. While information about the mean of this distribution is increasingly available from modelling and remote sensing, the full distribution cannot yet be resolved. We analyse 33 539 snow depth measurements from 499 transects taken at Soviet drifting stations between 1955 and 1991 and derive a simple statistical distribution for snow depth over multi-year ice as a function of only the mean snow depth. We then evaluate this snow depth distribution against snow depth transects that span first-year ice to multiyear ice from the MOSAiC, SHEBA and AMSR-Ice field campaigns. Because the distribution can be generated using only the mean snow depth, it can be used in the downscaling of several existing snow depth products for use in flux modelling and altimetry studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of GlaciologySame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207