Assessing the Parameterization of RADARSAT-2 Dual-polarized ScanSAR Scenes on the Accuracy of a Convolutional Neural Network for Sea Ice Classification: Case Study over Coronation Gulf, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic amplification has many impacts on sea-ice extent, thickness, and flux.It becomes critical to monitor sea-ice conditions at finer spatio-temporal resolution.We used a simple convolutional neural network (CNN) on the RADARSAT-2 dual-polarized ScanSAR wide archive available over Coronation Gulf, Canada, to assess which SAR parameter improves model performances to classify sea ice from water on a large volume of data covering 11 years of ice and surface water conditions.An overall accuracy of 90.1% was achieved on 989 scenes of 100% ice cover or ice-free conditions.An accuracy of 86.3% was achieved on the last year of data (134 scenes) which was kept out of the training process to test the model on an independent dataset.A better accuracy is obtained at lower incidence angles and the HH polarization provides the most information to classify ice from water.To achieve the best accuracy, the incidence angle and the noise equivalent sigma-nought had to be included as input to the model.A comparison done with the ASI passive microwave product shows similar errors in total sea ice concentration when using the Canadian Ice Service regional charts as reference.Nonetheless, errors from both datasets differ and the CNN outputs show greater potential to reduce masked areas, given the better spatial resolution, enabling data classification closer to land and identify features not captured by the ASI dataset.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".