MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415595803 · doi:10.5194/tc-19-5111-2025

Combining observational data and numerical models to obtain a seamless high-temporal-resolution seasonal cycle of snow and ice mass balance at the MOSAiC Central Observatory

2025· article· en· W4415595803 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Polona Itkin, Glen E. Liston

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œcryosphere · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges ForskningsrådNational Science CouncilNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCanadian Space AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSnowSea iceArctic ice packArcticCryosphereAntarctic sea iceSea ice thicknessSnow field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) observations span an entire annual cycle of Arctic snow and sea ice cover. However, the measurements of atmospheric and ocean forcing, as well as distributed measurements of snow and ice properties, were occasionally interrupted for logistical reasons. The most prolonged interruption happened during the onset of the summer melt season. Here we introduce and apply a novel data–model fusion system that can assimilate relevant observational data in a collection of modeling tools (SnowModel-LG and HIGHTSI) to provide continuous high-temporal-resolution (3-hourly) time series of snow and sea ice parameters over the entire annual cycle. We used this system to analyze differences between the three main ice types found in the MOSAiC Central Observatory: relatively deformed second-year ice, second-year ice with extensive smooth refrozen melt pond surfaces, and first-year ice. Since SnowModel-LG and HIGHTSI were used in a 1-D configuration, we used a sea ice dynamics term D to parameterize the redistribution of snow to newly created ridges and leads. D correlated highly with the sea ice deformation (R2 = 59 %, N=33) in the vicinity of the observatory, and deformation appears to explain as much as 15 % of all winter snow water equivalent. In addition, we show, in separate simulations for level ice, that snow bedforms with thin snow in the bedform troughs largely control the ice growth. Here, the mean snow depth minus 1 standard deviation was required to simulate realistic sea ice thickness using HIGHTSI; we surmise that this accounts for the control of relatively thin snow on local ice growth. Despite different initial sea ice thickness and freeze-up dates, the sea ice thickness of level ice across all ice types became similar by early winter. Our simulations suggest that the mean (spatially distributed) MOSAiC snowmelt onset began in late May but was interrupted by a snowfall event and was delayed by 3 weeks until mid- June. The level ice started to melt in the last week of June. Depending on the sea ice topography, the ice was snow-free by late June and early July.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œcryosphereSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207