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 OpenAlexaff
Siwen Chen, Kehan Li, Hongpeng Fu, Ying Cheng Wu, Yiyi Huang

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations35
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmosphereSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207