Evolution of the Floe Size Distribution in Arctic Summer Based on High-Resolution Satellite Imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, based on high-resolution satellite images near an ice bridge in the Canadian Basin, we extracted floe size parameters and analyzed the temporal and spatial variations in the parameters through image processing techniques. The floe area shows a decreasing trend over time, while the perimeter and mean clamped diameter (MCD) exhibit no obvious pattern of change. In addition, the roundness of floes, reflected by shape parameters, generally decreases initially and then increases, and the average roundness of small floes is smaller than that of large floes. To correct the deviations from power law behaviour when assessing the floe size distribution (FSD) with the traditional power law function, the upper-truncated power law distribution function and the Weibull function are selected. The four parameters of the two functions are important parameters for describing the floe size distribution, and Lr and L0 are roughly equal to the maximum calliper diameter and the average calliper diameter of the floes in the region. D in the upper-truncated power law distribution function represents the fractal dimension of the floes, and r in the Weibull function represents the shape parameter of the floes, both of which increase and then decrease with time. In this paper, we investigate the response of the rate of change in the FSD parameter to the differences in the monthly average temperature and find that D, r and air temperature are positively correlated, which verifies the influence of air temperature on the floe size distribution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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".