MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401399426 · doi:10.5194/tc-18-3471-2024

The AutoICE Challenge

2024· article· en· W4401399426 on OpenAlexaff
Andreas Stokholm, Jørgen Buus-Hinkler, Tore Wulf, Anton Korosov, Roberto Saldo, Leif Toudal Pedersen, David Arthurs, Ionut Dragan, Iacopo Modica, Juan Pedro, Annekatrien Debien, Xinwei Chen, Muhammed Patel, Fernando J. Pena Cantu, Javier Noa Turnes, Jinman Park, Linlin Xu, Katharine Scott, David A. Clausi, Yuan Fang, Mingzhe Jiang, Saeid Taleghanidoozdoozan, Neil C. Brubacher, Armina Soleymani, Zacharie Gousseau, Patryk Kowalski, Jacek Komorowski, David Rijlaarsdam, Jan N. van Rijn, Jens Jakobsen, Martin S. J. Rogers, Nick Hughes, Tom Zagon, Rune Solberg, Nicolas Longépé, Matilde Brandt Kreiner

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œcryosphere · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Mapping sea ice in the Arctic is essential for maritime navigation, and growing vessel traffic highlights the necessity of the timeliness and accuracy of sea ice charts. In addition, with the increased availability of satellite imagery, automation is becoming more important. The AutoICE Challenge investigates the possibility of creating deep learning models capable of mapping multiple sea ice parameters automatically from spaceborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery and assesses the current state of the automatic-sea-ice-mapping scientific field. This was achieved by providing the tools and encouraging participants to adopt the paradigm of retrieving multiple sea ice parameters rather than the current focus on single sea ice parameters, such as concentration. The paper documents the efforts and analyses, compares, and discusses the performance of the top-five participants’ submissions. Participants were tasked with the development of machine learning algorithms mapping the total sea ice concentration, stage of development, and floe size using a state-of-the-art sea ice dataset with dual-polarised Sentinel-1 SAR images and 22 other relevant variables while using professionally labelled sea ice charts from multiple national ice services as reference data. The challenge had 129 teams representing a total of 179 participants, with 34 teams delivering 494 submissions, resulting in a participation rate of 26.4 %, and it was won by a team from the University of Waterloo. Participants were successful in training models capable of retrieving multiple sea ice parameters with convolutional neural networks and vision transformer models. The top participants scored best on the total sea ice concentration and stage of development, while the floe size was more difficult. Furthermore, participants offered intriguing approaches and ideas that could help propel future research within automatic sea ice mapping, such as applying high downsampling of SAR data to improve model efficiency and produce better results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.029

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œcryosphereSame topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207