Mapping geodetically inferred Antarctic ice surface height changes into thickness changes: a sensitivity study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Determining recent Antarctic ice volume changes from satellite altimeter measurements of ice surface height requires a correction for contemporaneous vertical crustal deformation. This correction must consider two main sources of crustal deformation: (1) ongoing glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA), that is, the deformational, gravitational, and rotational response to Late Pleistocene and Holocene ice and ocean mass changes and (2) modern ice mass change. In this study, we seek to quantify the uncertainties associated with each of these corrections. Corrections of ice surface height changes for correction 1 have generally involved the adoption of global models of GIA defined by some preferred combination of ice history and mantle viscoelastic structure. We have computed the GIA correction generated from a coupled ice sheet–sea level model and a realistic Earth model incorporating three-dimensional viscoelastic structure. Integrating the difference between this correction and those from recent GIA analyses widely adopted in the literature yields an uncertainty in total present-day ice volume change equivalent to approximately 10 % of Antarctic ice mass loss inferred for the period 2010–2020. This reinforces earlier work indicating that ice histories characterized by relatively high excess ice volume at the Last Glacial Maximum may be introducing a significant error in estimates of modern melt rates. Regarding correction 2, a spatially invariant scaling has commonly been used to convert GIA-corrected ice surface height changes obtained from satellite altimetry to ice volume estimates. We adopt modeling results based on a projection of Antarctic ice mass change over the period 2015–2055 to demonstrate a spatial variability in the scaling of up to 10 % across the ice sheet. Furthermore, using these calculations, we find a systematic error of ∼ 3 % in the projected net ice volume change, with most of the difference arising in areas of West Antarctica above mantle zones of low viscosity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".