SAR deep learning sea ice retrieval trained with airborne laser scanner measurements from the MOSAiC expedition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated sea ice charting from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) has been researched for more than a decade, and we are still not close to unlocking the full potential of automated solutions in terms of resolution and accuracy. The central complications arise from ground truth data not being readily available in the polar regions. In this paper, we build a data set from 20 near-coincident x-band SAR acquisitions and as many airborne laser scanner (ALS) measurements from the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC), between October and May. This data set is then used to assess the accuracy and robustness of five machine-learning-based approaches by deriving classes from the freeboard, surface roughness (standard deviation at 0.5 m correlation length) and reflectance. It is shown that there is only a weak correlation between the radar backscatter and the sea ice topography. Accuracies between 44 % and 66 % and robustness between 71 % and 83 % give a realistic insight into the performance of modern convolutional neural network architectures across a range of ice conditions over 8 months. It also marks the first time algorithms have been trained entirely with labels from coincident measurements, allowing for a probabilistic class retrieval. The results show that segmentation models able to learn from the class distribution perform significantly better than pixel-wise classification approaches by nearly 20 % accuracy on average.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".