MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380997829 · doi:10.3390/atmos14061023

Sea Ice Extent Prediction with Machine Learning Methods and Subregional Analysis in the Arctic

2023· article· en· W4380997829 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmosphere · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea iceClimatologyArctic ice packArcticSea ice concentrationEnvironmental scienceCryosphereArctic sea ice declineClimate changePhysical geographyAntarctic sea iceSea ice thicknessOceanographyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decline of sea ice in the Arctic region is a critical indicator of rapid global warming and can also influence the feedback processes in the Arctic, so the prediction of sea ice extent and thickness plays an important role in climate modeling and prediction. This paper uses machine learning methods to predict the sea ice extent, and by adjusting the methods and factors, which include the climate variables, the past sea ice extent, and the simple linear-regression-simulated sea ice extent, then we found the best combination to give the result with the highest R2 score. We noticed that with longer periods of past sea ice extent data and shorter periods of climate data, the results appeared to be better. This might be related to the difference in climate and ocean memory. The sub-region sea ice extent prediction shows that the regions with whole-year ice cover are easier to predict and that those regions with sudden weather changes and significant seasonal variability appear to have lower R2 scores in the sea ice extent prediction.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.243
Teacher spread0.231 · 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