Assessing Ice Break-Up Trends in Slave River Delta through Satellite Observations and Random Forest Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seasonal temperature trends and ice phenology in the Great Slave Lake (GSL) are significantly influenced by inflow from the Slave River. The river undergoes a sequence of mechanical break-ups all the way to the GSL, initiating the GSL break-up process. Additionally, upstream water management practices impact the discharge of the Slave River and, consequently, the ice break-up of the GSL. Therefore, monitoring the break-up process at the Slave River Delta (SRD), where the river meets the lake, is crucial for understanding the cascading effects of upstream activities on GSL ice break-up. This research aimed to use Random Forest (RF) models to monitor the ice break-up processes at the SRD using a combination of satellite images with relatively high spatial resolution, including Landsat-5, Landsat-8, Sentinel-2a, and Sentinel-2b. The RF models were trained using selected training pixels to classify ice, open water, and cloud. The onset of break-up was determined by data-driven thresholds on the ice fraction in images with less than 20% cloud coverage. Analysis of break-up timing from 1984 to 2023 revealed a significant earlier trend using the Mann–Kendall test with a p-value of 0.05. Furthermore, break-up data in recent years show a high degree of variability in the break-up rate using images in recent years with better temporal resolution.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".