MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392727143 · doi:10.5194/essd-16-1247-2024

Mapping of sea ice concentration using the NASA NIMBUS 5 Electrically Scanning Microwave Radiometer data from 1972–1977

2024· article· en· W4392727143 on OpenAlexaff
Wiebke Margitta Kolbe, Rasmus Tonboe, Julienne Strœve

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth system science data · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiometerMicrowave radiometerRemote sensingMicrowaveEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The Electrically Scanning Microwave Radiometer (ESMR) instrument onboard the NIMBUS 5 satellite was a one-channel microwave radiometer that measured the 19.35 GHz horizontally polarized brightness temperature (TB) from 11 December 1972 to 16 May 1977. The original tape archive data in swath projection have recently been made available online by the NASA Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC). Even though the ESMR was a predecessor of modern multi-frequency radiometers, there are still parts of modern processing methodologies which can be applied to the data to derive the sea ice extent globally. Here, we have reprocessed the entire dataset using a modern processing methodology that includes the implementation of pre-processing filtering, dynamical tie points, and a radiative transfer model (RTM) together with numerical weather prediction (NWP) for atmospheric correction. We present the one-channel sea ice concentration (SIC) algorithm and the model for computing temporally and spatially varying SIC uncertainty estimates. Post-processing steps include resampling to daily grids, land-spillover correction, the application of climatological masks, the setting of processing flags, and the estimation of sea ice extent, monthly means, and trends. This sea ice dataset derived from the NIMBUS 5 ESMR extends the sea ice record with an important reference from the mid-1970s. To make it easier to perform a consistent analysis of sea ice development over time, the same grid and land mask as used for EUMETSAT's OSI-SAF SMMR-based sea-ice climate data record (CDR) were used for our ESMR dataset. SIC uncertainties were included to further ease comparison to other datasets and time periods. We find that our sea ice extent in the Arctic and Antarctic in the 1970s is generally higher than those available from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC), which were derived from the same ESMR dataset, with mean differences of 240 000 and 590 000 km2, respectively. When comparing monthly sea ice extents, the largest differences reach up to 2 million km2. Such large differences cannot be explained by the different grids and land masks of the datasets alone and must therefore also result from the differences in data filtering and algorithms, such as the dynamical tie points and atmospheric correction. The new ESMR SIC dataset has been released as part of the ESA Climate Change Initiative (ESA CCI) program and is publicly available at https://doi.org/10.5285/34a15b96f1134d9e95b9e486d74e49cf (Tonboe et al., 2023).

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth system science dataSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207