Automatic snow type classification of snow micropenetrometer profiles with machine learning algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Snow-layer segmentation and classification are essential diagnostic tasks for various cryospheric applications. The SnowMicroPen (SMP) measures the snowpack's penetration force at submillimeter intervals in snow depth. The resulting depth–force profile can be parameterized for density and specific surface area. However, no information on traditional snow types is currently extracted automatically. The labeling of snow types is a time-intensive task that requires practice and becomes infeasible for large datasets. Previous work showed that automated segmentation and classification is, in theory, possible but cannot be applied to data straight from the field or needs additional time-costly information, such as from classified snow pits. We evaluate how well machine learning models can automatically segment and classify SMP profiles to address this gap. We trained 14 models, among them semi-supervised models and artificial neural networks (ANNs), on the MOSAiC SMP dataset, an extensive collection of snow profiles on Arctic sea ice. SMP profiles can be successfully segmented and classified into snow classes based solely on the SMP's signal. The model comparison provided in this study enables SMP users to choose a suitable model for their task and dataset. The findings presented will facilitate and accelerate snow type identification through SMP profiles. Anyone can access the tools and models needed to automate snow type identification via the software repository “snowdragon”. Overall, snowdragon creates a link between traditional snow classification and high-resolution force–depth profiles. Traditional snow profile observations can be compared to SMP profiles with such a tool.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".