MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408432515 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-12073

Arctic landfast ice simulation with brittle rheology and probabilistic grounding

2025· preprint· en· W4408432515 on OpenAlexaff
Augustin Lambotte, T. Fichefet, François Massonnet, Laurent Brodeau, Pierre Rampal, Jean‐François Lemieux, Frédéric Dupont

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaGDG Environnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicRheologyGeologyArcticBrittlenessPsychologyComputer scienceGeotechnical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMaterials scienceOceanographyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Landfast ice, i.e., sea ice that is mechanically immobilized for several weeks along the coasts, significantly influences the underlying ocean by controlling the occurrence of coastal polynyas and the formation of dense water within. However, it is usually poorly represented in numerical models. In the Arctic, the accurate simulation of landfast ice relies on parameterizing sea ice grounding in shallow water areas and on the sea ice rheology capability to form ice arches in regions with restricted geometry. In this study, we compare a brittle rheology (i.e., the Brittle Bingham-Maxwell or BBM one), newly implemented in the ocean-sea ice model NEMO-SI3, with a standard viscous-plastic rheology (i.e., the aEVP), which is widely used in sea ice models. The performance of the two rheologies in forming ice arches and landfast ice is evaluated at the scale of the Arctic at a 0.25° horizontal resolution. For the grounding parameterization, we apply a probabilistic grounding scheme based on the ice thickness distribution and investigate how leveraging subgrid-scale bathymetry statistics can enhance its performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→