Potential of X-band polarimetric synthetic aperture radar co-polar phase difference for arctic snow depth estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in snowpack associated with climatic warming has drastic impacts on surface energy balance in the cryosphere. Yet, traditional monitoring techniques, such as punctual measurements in the field, do not cover the full snowpack spatial and temporal variability, which hampers efforts to upscale measurements to the global scale. This variability is one of the primary constraints in model development. In terms of spatial resolution, active microwaves (synthetic aperture radar – SAR) can address the issue and outperform methods based on passive microwaves. Thus, high-spatial-resolution monitoring of snow depth (SD) would allow for better parameterization of local processes that drive the spatial variability of snow. The overall objective of this study is to evaluate the potential of the TerraSAR-X (TSX) SAR sensor and the wave co-polar phase difference (CPD) method for characterizing snow cover at high spatial resolution. Consequently, we first (1) investigate SD and depth hoar fraction (DHF) variability between different vegetation classes in the Ice Creek catchment (Qikiqtaruk/Herschel Island, Yukon, Canada) using in situ measurements collected over the course of a field campaign in 2019; (2) evaluate linkages between snow characteristics and CPD distribution over the 2019 dataset; and (3) determine CPD seasonality considering meteorological data over the 2015–2019 period. SD could be extracted using the CPD when certain conditions are met. A high incidence angle (>30∘) with a high topographic wetness index (TWI) (>7.0) showed correlation between SD and CPD ( R 2 up to 0.72). Further, future work should address a threshold of sensitivity to TWI and incidence angle to map snow depth in such environments and assess the potential of using interpolation tools to fill in gaps in SD information on drier vegetation types.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".