Advancing snow grain classification for snow micro-penetrometer signals using machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The layered nature of snow is a key characteristic of the seasonal alpine snowpack. In fact, snow stratigraphy influences all physical processes e.g., mechanical or thermal behavior. In order to describe these physical processes precisely, a profound and objective representation of the snow stratigraphy is paramount. The Snow-Micro Penetrometer (SMP) is a rod-driven snow penetrometer that provides resistance-force profiles across snow depth, offering an objective method to measure vertical snow stratigraphy. These submillimeter-scale profiles facilitate the derivation of a micro-mechanical snow model. These derivatives have the potential to initialize complex, physics-based snow cover models (e.g., SNOWPACK). While many parameters for snowpack simulations can be derived directly, determining grain type remains challenging due to the absence of a clear physical correlation. To address this, machine learning (ML) approaches have been investigated. However, prior ML models are limited in their number of snow grain type classes and datasets, which prevents the operational use of these models. Recently, Kaltenborn et al. introduced Snowdragon, a ML benchmark for automated classification and segmentation of SMP profiles. The current version of Snowdragon is trained on SMP profiles collected during the MOSAiC expedition and contains only specific non-standardized grain types typically observed for snow on Arctic sea ice. In this work, we re-trained the supervised models of the Snowdragon benchmark on Alpine snow. To enable the usage of Snowdragon for a broader community, we adapted the classification of grain types according to the international standard for seasonal snow. Our dataset comprises 52 manually labeled SMP profiles recorded in Alpine snow in Switzerland. Previously identified high-performing ML models were re-trained without additional hyperparameter tuning and subsequently evaluated. We found that the ML model Random Forest performed best but nevertheless had difficulties in recognizing faceted crystals, similar to the other models. Additionally, all models react sensitive to minor force changes in the SMP profiles, often leading to predictions of alternating micro-classes between two grain types. These preliminary results demonstrate the feasibility of this approach for grain type classification, but underscore the limitations posed by the small dataset size. Future work will focus on expanding the training dataset and developing a robust interface for operational use of the prediction output. This work marks a step toward more reliable and generalizable snow grain classification of SMP signals for operational use, like snowpack modeling and avalanche assessment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".