Review of River Ice Observation and Data Analysis Technologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides a comprehensive review of the available literature on the observation and characterization of river ice using remote sensing technologies. Through an analysis of 200 publications spanning from 1919 to June 2024, we reviewed different observation technologies deployed on in situ, aerial and satellite platforms for their utility in monitoring and characterizing river ice covers. River ice information, captured by 51 terms extracted from the literature, holds significant value in enhancing infrastructure resilience in the face of climate change. Satellite technologies, in particular the multispectral optical and multi-polarimetric synthetic aperture radar (SAR), provide a number of advantages, such as ice features discrimination, better ice characterization, and reliable delineation of open water and ice, with both current and upcoming sensors. The review includes data analysis methods employed for the monitoring and characterization of river ice, including ice information retrieval methods and corresponding accuracies. The need for further research on artificial intelligence and, in particular, deep learning (DL) techniques has been recognized as valuable for enhancing the accuracy of automated systems. The growing availability of freely available and commercial satellites, UAVs, and in situ data with improved characteristics suggests significant operational potential for river ice observation in the near future. Our study also identifies gaps in the current capabilities for river ice observation and provides suggestions for improved data analysis and interpretation.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".