MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416452682 · doi:10.1016/j.rsase.2025.101797

Satellite image processing in the circumpolar north: Understanding climate crisis by predicting sea ice extent in the arctic

2025· article· en· W4416452682 on OpenAlexafffund
Ishadie Namir, Muhammad Hussain, Sheela Ramanna, Qian Liu, Pradeeban Kathiravelu

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing Applications Society and Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCircumpolar starSea iceSnowArcticSatelliteArctic ice packMean squared errorThe arctic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observing and analyzing the changing polar ice patterns is crucial for understanding the climate crisis. Research works across the Circumpolar North use machine learning models to study and predict changes in sea ice. In this paper, we propose a deep learning model using satellite images of the Arctic, captured daily and monthly over a half-century period and curated at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), to forecast future ice extent. We perform a time-series analysis using a multimodal approach, combining a gated recurrent unit (GRU) with a transformer-based model to predict changes in Arctic ice. Our model explains approximately 92.02% of the variance in the true ice extent time series. The error metrics were low: We observed the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) to be, respectively, 0.1362 and 0.1637. Preliminary assessments of our prototype show promising results in understanding past trends and making predictions.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote Sensing Applications Society and EnvironmentSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207