MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Observations of Coherent L-Band Emission from Snow-Covered Arctic Sea Ice

2025· article· W7117311833 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ferran Hernández-Macià, Marcus Huntemann, Carolina Gabarró, Gunnar Spreen, Randall K. Scharien

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea iceArcticArctic ice packCryosphereThe arcticArctic sea ice declineSea ice concentrationRadiometric dating

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiometric measurements at L-band (1.4 GHz), collected in the Canadian Arctic in 2024, are used to study which modeling framework best reproduces the observations. While incoherent radiative transfer models are standard for sea ice thickness retrievals, they neglect phase interference effects. However, the observations analyzed here can only be explained when interference phenomena are explicitly included, requiring a coherent approach. To reduce uncertainties and ensure the robustness of the models, a cost function is minimized using an optimization-based method to infer optimal snow and sea ice parameters consistent with the measured brightness temperatures and in situ ancillary data. The results show that the coherent model reproduces the observations substantially better, highlighting the relevance of coherence effects at this low microwave frequency. With these effects measured locally, their cumulative contribution at the scale of satellite footprints may also be non-negligible, requiring further investigation into their potential impact on large-scale retrievals.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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