A statistical study of sea ice thickness and coverage in the Canadian Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Arctic sea ice cover has significantly declined over the recent decades. The debate on whether this decline is caused by anthropogenic activity or internal cycles is still ongoing. However, despite this uncertainty, some physical factors reinforce this declining trend, one of which is sea ice thickness. The thinning of Arctic sea ice facilitates the melting of sea ice by reducing the heat capacity of the ice volume. The progression of this thinning can potentially accelerate sea ice loss. In this work, we attempt to understand the broad relationship of sea ice cover levels and average sea ice thickness in the Arctic. First, we attempt to understand whether the trend in the Arctic sea ice thickness is statistically significant over multi-year and inter-year seasonal scales, by using mostly non-parametric trend analysis tools. We subsequently study how sea ice thickness, as well as its momentum and fluctuations, are statistically correlated to those of sea ice cover in the Arctic. For this task, we use publicly available Arctic sea ice cover and thickness data from 1979 to 2021, provided by the Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modelling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS) and the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC).
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".