MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386846630 · doi:10.5194/tc-17-4047-2023

Deformation lines in Arctic sea ice: intersection angle distribution and mechanical properties

2023· article· en· W4386846630 on OpenAlexaff
Damien Ringeisen, Nils Hutter, Luisa von Albedyll

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œcryosphere · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSea iceGeologyArcticGeodesyArctic ice packGeometryClimatologyOceanographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Despite its relevance for the Arctic climate and ecosystem, modeling sea-ice deformation, i.e., the opening, shearing, and ridging of sea ice, along linear kinematic features (LKFs) remains challenging, as the mechanical properties of sea ice are not yet fully understood. The intersection angles between LKFs provide valuable information on the internal mechanical properties, as they are linked to them. Currently, the LKFs emerging from sea-ice rheological models do not reproduce the observed LKF intersection angles, pointing to a gap in the model physics. We aim to obtain an intersection angle distribution (IAD) from observational data to serve as a reference for high-resolution sea-ice models and to infer the mechanical properties of the sea-ice cover. We use the sea-ice vorticity to discriminate between acute and obtuse LKF intersection angles within two sea-ice deformation datasets: the RADARSAT Geophysical Processor System (RGPS) and a new dataset from the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) drift experiment. Acute angles dominate the IAD, with single peaks at 48∘±2 and 45∘±7. The IAD agrees well between both datasets, despite the difference in scale, time period, and geographical location. The divergence and shear rates of the LKFs also have the same distribution. The dilatancy angle (the ratio of shear and divergence) is not correlated with the intersection angle. Using the IAD, we infer two important mechanical properties of the sea ice: we found an internal angle of friction in sea ice of μI=0.66±0.02 and μI=0.75±0.05. The shape of the yield curve or the plastic potential derived from the observed IAD resembles a teardrop or a Mohr–Coulomb shape. With these new insights, sea-ice rheologies used in models can be adapted or redesigned to improve the representation of sea-ice deformation.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œcryosphereSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207