MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Snow depth on Arctic sea ice retrieval using a synergy of Sentinel-3's active and passive microwave instruments

2025· article· W7117327797 on OpenAlexaff
Julienne Stroeve, Thomas Lavergne, Jack Landy, Rosemary Willatt, Thomas Johnson, Fabrizio Baordo, Robbie Mallett, Michel Tsamados

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowSea iceRadiometerMicrowave radiometerSnow coverArcticMicrowaveSea ice concentration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Snow depth remains one of the largest sources of uncertainty in satellite-derived sea ice thickness (SIT). Here, we introduce the novel Nadir Radiometer and Radar Synergy (NaRRS) method that combines data from Sentinel-3’s Microwave Radiometer (MWR) and Synthetic Aperture Radar Altimeter (SRAL) to retrieve Arctic snow depth on sea ice. The resultant snow depths are co-located with SRAL-derived radar freeboard, reducing spatio-temporal mismatches in SIT processing. NaRRS achieves an R2 of 0.72 and RMSE of 0.05 m in cross-validation against Operation IceBridge snow depth data, and better matches IceBird observations than the modified Warren Climatology (mW99). Ice drafts estimated from coupled snow depth and freeboard align with mW99 against Beaufort Sea moorings but reduce bias by up to 50% against Fram Strait moorings. This work provides a proof-of-concept for simultaneous, co-located snow depth and SIT retrievals, paving the way for next-generation satellite missions and retrieval frameworks.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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