Satellite Passive Microwave Sea-Ice Concentration Data Set Intercomparison: Closed Ice and Ship-Based Observations

Abstract. Accurate sea-ice concentration (SIC) data are a pre-requisite to reliably monitor the polar sea-ice covers. Over the last four decades, many algorithms have been developed to retrieve the SIC from satellite microwave radiometry, some of them applied to generate long-term data products. We report on results of a systematic inter-comparison of ten global SIC data products at 12.5 to 50.0 km grid resolution for both the Arctic and the Antarctic. The products are compared with each other with respect to differences in SIC, sea-ice area (SIA), and sea-ice extent (SIE), and they are compared against a global winter-time near-100 % reference SIC data set for closed pack ice conditions and against global year-round ship-based visual observations of the sea-ice cover. We can group the products based on the observed inter-product consistency and differences of the inter-comparison results. Group I consists of data sets using the self-optimizing EUMETSAT-OSISAF – ESA-CCI algorithms. Group II includes data using the NASA-Team 2 and Comiso-Bootstrap algorithms, and the NOAA-NSIDC sea-ice concentration climate data record (CDR). The standard NASA-Team and the ARTIST Sea Ice (ASI) algorithms are put into a separate group III because of their often quite diverse results. Within group I and II evaluation results and intra-product differences are mostly very similar. For instance, among group I products, SIA agrees within ±100 000 km2 in both hemispheres during maximum and minimum sea-ice cover. Among group II products, satellite- minus ship-based SIC differences agree within ±0.7 %. Standing out with large negative differences to other products and evaluation data is the standard NASA-Team algorithm, in both hemispheres. The three CDRs of group I (SICCI-25km, SICCI-50km, and OSI-450) are biased low compared to the 100 % reference SIC with biases of −0.4 % to −1.0 % (Arctic) and −0.3 % to −1.1 % (Antarctic). Products of group II appear to be mostly biased high in the Arctic by between +1.0 % and +3.5 %, while their biases in the Antarctic only range from −0.2 to +0.9 %. The standard deviation is smaller in the Arctic for the quoted group I products: 1.9 % to 2.9 % and Antarctic: 2.5 % to 3.1 %, than for group II products: Arctic: 3.6 % to 5.0 %, Antarctic: 4.5 % to 5.4 %. Products of group I exhibit larger overall satellite- minus ship-based SIC differences than group II in both hemispheres. However, compared to group II, group I products’ standard deviations are smaller, correlations higher and evaluation results are less sensitive to seasonal changes. We discuss the impact of truncating the SIC distribution, as naturally retrieved by the algorithms around the 100 % sea-ice concentration end. We show that evaluation studies of such truncated SIC products can result in misleading statistics and favour data sets that systematically overestimate SIC. We describe a method to re-construct the un-truncated distribution of SIC before the evaluation is performed. On the basis of this evaluation, we open a discussion about the overestimation of SIC in data products, with far-reaching consequences for, e.g., surface heat-flux estimations in winter. We also document inconsistencies in the behaviour of the weather filters used in products of group II, and suggest advancing studies about the influence of these weather filters on SIA and SIE time-series and their trends.

Download Full-text

Satellite passive microwave sea-ice concentration data set intercomparison: closed ice and ship-based observations

The Cryosphere ◽

10.5194/tc-13-3261-2019 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 13 (12) ◽

pp. 3261-3307 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Stefan Kern ◽

Thomas Lavergne ◽

Dirk Notz ◽

Leif Toudal Pedersen ◽

Rasmus Tage Tonboe ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sea Ice ◽

The Arctic ◽

Data Sets ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Data Set ◽

Group Iii ◽

Group I ◽

Ice Concentration ◽

Group Ii ◽

The Antarctic

Abstract. We report on results of a systematic inter-comparison of 10 global sea-ice concentration (SIC) data products at 12.5 to 50.0 km grid resolution for both the Arctic and the Antarctic. The products are compared with each other with respect to differences in SIC, sea-ice area (SIA), and sea-ice extent (SIE), and they are compared against a global wintertime near-100 % reference SIC data set for closed pack ice conditions and against global year-round ship-based visual observations of the sea-ice cover. We can group the products based on the concept of their SIC retrieval algorithms. Group I consists of data sets using the self-optimizing EUMETSAT OSI SAF and ESA CCI algorithms. Group II includes data using the Comiso bootstrap algorithm and the NOAA NSIDC sea-ice concentration climate data record (CDR). The standard NASA Team and the ARTIST Sea Ice (ASI) algorithms are put into group III, and NASA Team 2 is the only element of group IV. The three CDRs of group I (SICCI-25km, SICCI-50km, and OSI-450) are biased low compared to a 100 % reference SIC data set with biases of −0.4 % to −1.0 % (Arctic) and −0.3 % to −1.1 % (Antarctic). Products of group II appear to be mostly biased high in the Arctic by between +1.0 % and +3.5 %, while their biases in the Antarctic range from −0.2 % to +0.9 %. Group III product biases are different for the Arctic, +0.9 % (NASA Team) and −3.7 % (ASI), but similar for the Antarctic, −5.4 % and −5.6 %, respectively. The standard deviation is smaller in the Arctic for the quoted group I products (1.9 % to 2.9 %) and Antarctic (2.5 % to 3.1 %) than for group II and III products: 3.6 % to 5.0 % for the Arctic and 4.0 % to 6.5 % for the Antarctic. We refer to the paper to understand why we could not give values for group IV here. We discuss the impact of truncating the SIC distribution, as naturally retrieved by the algorithms around the 100 % sea-ice concentration end. We show that evaluation studies of such truncated SIC products can result in misleading statistics and favour data sets that systematically overestimate SIC. We describe a method to reconstruct the non-truncated distribution of SIC before the evaluation is performed. On the basis of this evaluation, we open a discussion about the overestimation of SIC in data products, with far-reaching consequences for surface heat flux estimations in winter. We also document inconsistencies in the behaviour of the weather filters used in products of group II, and we suggest advancing studies about the influence of these weather filters on SIA and SIE time series and their trends.

Download Full-text

Convolutional Neural Networks for Sea Ice Concentration Charting for Maritime Navigation in the Arctic

10.5194/egusphere-egu21-15193 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Andreas Stokholm ◽

Leif Pedersen ◽

René Forsberg ◽

Sine Hvidegaard

Keyword(s):

Sea Ice ◽

Arctic Sea Ice ◽

The Arctic ◽

Arctic Seas ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Data Set ◽

Architecture Model ◽

Radar Images ◽

North East ◽

Ice Concentration

<p>In recent years the Arctic has seen renewed political and economic interest, increased maritime traffic and desire for improved sea ice navigational tools. Despite a rise in digital technology, maps of sea ice concentration used for Arctic maritime operations are still today created by humans manually interpreting radar images. This process is slow with low map release frequency, uncertainties up to 20 % and discrepancies up to 60 %. Utilizing emerging AI Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) semantic image segmentation techniques to automate this process is drastically changing navigation in the Arctic seas, with better resolution, accuracy, release frequency and coverage. Automatic Arctic sea ice products may contribute to enabling the disruptive Northern Sea Route connecting North East Asia to Europe via the Arctic oceans.</p><p>The AI4Arctic/ASIP V2 data set, that combines 466 Sentinel-1 HH and HV SAR images from Greenland, Passive Microwave Radiometry from the AMSR2 instrument, and an equivalent sea ice concentration chart produced by ice analysts at the Danish Meteorological Institute, have been used to train a CNN U-Net Architecture model. The model shows robust capabilities in producing highly detailed sea ice concentration maps with open water, intermediate sea ice concentrations as well as full sea ice cover, which resemble those created by professional sea ice analysts. Often cited obstacles in automatic sea ice concentration models are wind-roughened sea ambiguities resembling sea ice. Final inference scenes show robustness towards such ambiguities.</p>

Download Full-text

Brief communication: The challenge and benefit of using sea ice concentration satellite data products with uncertainty estimates in summer sea ice data assimilation

The Cryosphere ◽

10.5194/tc-10-761-2016 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 761-774 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Qinghua Yang ◽

Martin Losch ◽

Svetlana N. Losa ◽

Thomas Jung ◽

Lars Nerger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Data Assimilation ◽

Sea Ice ◽

Satellite Data ◽

General Circulation ◽

The Arctic ◽

Concentration Data ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Uncertainty Estimates ◽

Ice Concentration ◽

Data Products

Abstract. Data assimilation experiments that aim at improving summer ice concentration and thickness forecasts in the Arctic are carried out. The data assimilation system used is based on the MIT general circulation model (MITgcm) and a local singular evolutive interpolated Kalman (LSEIK) filter. The effect of using sea ice concentration satellite data products with appropriate uncertainty estimates is assessed by three different experiments using sea ice concentration data of the European Space Agency Sea Ice Climate Change Initiative (ESA SICCI) which are provided with a per-grid-cell physically based sea ice concentration uncertainty estimate. The first experiment uses the constant uncertainty, the second one imposes the provided SICCI uncertainty estimate, while the third experiment employs an elevated minimum uncertainty to account for a representation error. Using the observation uncertainties that are provided with the data improves the ensemble mean forecast of ice concentration compared to using constant data errors, but the thickness forecast, based on the sparsely available data, appears to be degraded. Further investigating this lack of positive impact on the sea ice thicknesses leads us to a fundamental mismatch between the satellite-based radiometric concentration and the modeled physical ice concentration in summer: the passive microwave sensors used for deriving the vast majority of the sea ice concentration satellite-based observations cannot distinguish ocean water (in leads) from melt water (in ponds). New data assimilation methodologies that fully account or mitigate this mismatch must be designed for successful assimilation of sea ice concentration satellite data in summer melt conditions. In our study, thickness forecasts can be slightly improved by adopting the pragmatic solution of raising the minimum observation uncertainty to inflate the data error and ensemble spread.

Download Full-text

Satellite Passive Microwave Sea-Ice Concentration Data Set Intercomparison for Arctic Summer Conditions

10.5194/tc-2020-35 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Stefan Kern ◽

Thomas Lavergne ◽

Dirk Notz ◽

Leif Toudal Pedersen ◽

Rasmus Tage Tonboe

Keyword(s):

Spatial Distribution ◽

Sea Ice ◽

Passive Microwave ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Group Iii ◽

Melt Pond ◽

Ice Surface ◽

Group I ◽

Ice Concentration ◽

Group Ii

Abstract. We report on results of a systematic inter-comparison of 10 global sea-ice concentration (SIC) data products at 12.5 to 50.0 km grid resolution from satellite passive microwave (PMW) observations for the Arctic during summer. The products are compared against SIC and net ice-surface fraction (ISF) – SIC minus the per-grid cell melt-pond fraction (MPF) on sea ice – as derived from MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite observations and observed from ice-going vessels. Like in Kern et al. (2019), we group the 10 products based on the concept of the SIC retrieval used. Group I consists of products of the EUMETSAT OSI SAF and ESA CCI algorithms. Group II consists of products derived with the Comiso bootstrap algorithm and the NOAA NSIDC SIC climate data record (CDR). Group III consists of ARTIST Sea Ice (ASI) and NASA Team (NT) algorithm products and group IV consists of products of the enhanced NASA Team algorithm (NT2). We find wide-spread positive and negative differences between PMW and MODIS SIC with magnitudes frequently reaching up to 20–25 % for groups I and III and up to 30–35 % for groups II and IV. On a pan-Arctic scale these differences may cancel out: Arctic average SIC from Group I products agrees with MODIS within 2–5 % accuracy during the entire melt period from May through September. Group II and IV products over-estimate MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5–10 %. Out of group III, ASI is similar to group I products while NT SIC under-estimates MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5–10 %. These differences, when translated into the impact computing Arctic sea-ice area (SIA), match well with the differences in SIA between the four groups reported for the summer months by Kern et al. (2019). MODIS ISF is systematically over-estimated by all products; NT provides the smallest (up to 25 %) over-estimations, group II and IV products the largest (up to 45 %) over-estimations. The spatial distribution of the observed over-estimation of MODIS ISF agrees reasonably well with the spatial distribution of the MODIS MPF and we find a robust linear relationship between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF for group I and III products during peak melt, i.e. July and August. We discuss different cases taking into account the expected influence of ice-surface properties other than melt ponds, i.e. wet snow and coarse grained snow / refrozen surface, on PMW observations used in the SIC retrieval algorithms. Based on this discussion we identify the mismatch between the actually observed surface properties and those represented by the ice tie points as the most likely reason for i) the observed differences between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF and for ii) the often surprisingly small difference between PMW and MODIS SIC in areas of high melt-pond fraction. We conclude that all 10 SIC products are highly inaccurate during summer melt. We hypothesize that the un-known amount of melt-pond signatures likely included in the ice tie points plays an important role – particularly for groups I and II – and suggest to conduct further research in this field.

Download Full-text

Satellite passive microwave sea-ice concentration data set inter-comparison for Arctic summer conditions

The Cryosphere ◽

10.5194/tc-14-2469-2020 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 14 (7) ◽

pp. 2469-2493 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Stefan Kern ◽

Thomas Lavergne ◽

Dirk Notz ◽

Leif Toudal Pedersen ◽

Rasmus Tonboe

Keyword(s):

Spatial Distribution ◽

Sea Ice ◽

Passive Microwave ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Group Iii ◽

Melt Pond ◽

Ice Surface ◽

Group I ◽

Ice Concentration ◽

Group Ii

Abstract. We report on results of a systematic inter-comparison of 10 global sea-ice concentration (SIC) data products at 12.5 to 50.0 km grid resolution from satellite passive microwave (PMW) observations for the Arctic during summer. The products are compared against SIC and net ice surface fraction (ISF) – SIC minus the per-grid-cell melt pond fraction (MPF) on sea ice – as derived from MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) satellite observations and observed from ice-going vessels. Like in Kern et al. (2019), we group the 10 products based on the concept of the SIC retrieval used. Group I consists of products of the European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility (OSI SAF) and European Space Agency (ESA) Climate Change Initiative (CCI) algorithms. Group II consists of products derived with the Comiso bootstrap algorithm and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) SIC climate data record (CDR). Group III consists of Arctic Radiation and Turbulence Interaction Study (ARTIST) Sea Ice (ASI) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Team (NT) algorithm products, and group IV consists of products of the enhanced NASA Team algorithm (NT2). We find widespread positive and negative differences between PMW and MODIS SIC with magnitudes frequently reaching up to 20 %–25 % for groups I and III and up to 30 %–35 % for groups II and IV. On a pan-Arctic scale these differences may cancel out: Arctic average SIC from group I products agrees with MODIS within 2 %–5 % accuracy during the entire melt period from May through September. Group II and IV products overestimate MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5 %–10 %. Out of group III, ASI is similar to group I products while NT SIC underestimates MODIS Arctic average SIC by 5 %–10 %. These differences, when translated into the impact computing Arctic sea-ice area (SIA), match well with the differences in SIA between the four groups reported for the summer months by Kern et al. (2019). MODIS ISF is systematically overestimated by all products; NT provides the smallest overestimations (up to 25 %) and group II and IV products the largest overestimations (up to 45 %). The spatial distribution of the observed overestimation of MODIS ISF agrees reasonably well with the spatial distribution of the MODIS MPF and we find a robust linear relationship between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF for group I and III products during peak melt, i.e. July and August. We discuss different cases taking into account the expected influence of ice surface properties other than melt ponds, i.e. wet snow and coarse-grained snow/refrozen surface, on brightness temperatures and their ratios used as input to the SIC retrieval algorithms. Based on this discussion we identify the mismatch between the actually observed surface properties and those represented by the ice tie points as the most likely reason for (i) the observed differences between PMW SIC and MODIS ISF and for (ii) the often surprisingly small difference between PMW and MODIS SIC in areas of high melt pond fraction. We conclude that all 10 SIC products are highly inaccurate during summer melt. We hypothesize that the unknown number of melt pond signatures likely included in the ice tie points plays an important role – particularly for groups I and II – and recommend conducting further research in this field.

Download Full-text

Benefits of assimilating thin sea-ice thickness from SMOS-Ice into the TOPAZ system

10.5194/tc-2016-112 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Jiping Xie ◽

Francois Counillon ◽

Laurent Bertino ◽

Xiangshan Tian-Kunze ◽

Lars Kaleschke

Keyword(s):

Sea Ice ◽

Degrees Of Freedom ◽

Winter Season ◽

The Arctic ◽

Ice Thickness ◽

Data Sets ◽

Data Set ◽

Sea Ice Thickness ◽

Ice Concentration ◽

The Impact

Abstract. An observation product for thin sea ice thickness (SMOS-Ice) is derived from the brightness temperature data of the European Space Agency's (ESA) Soil Moisture and Ocean Salinity (SMOS) Mission, and available in real-time at daily frequency during the winter season. In this study, we investigate the benefit of assimilating SMOS-Ice into the TOPAZ system. TOPAZ is a coupled ocean-sea ice forecast system that assimilates SST, altimetry data, temperature and salinity profiles, ice concentration, and ice drift with the Ensemble Kalman Filter (EnKF). The conditions for assimilation of sea ice thickness thinner than 0.4 m are favorable, as observations are reliable below this threshold and their probability distribution is comparable to that of the model. Two paralleled runs of TOPAZ have been performed respectively in March and November 2014, with assimilation of thin sea ice thickness (thinner than 0.4 m) in addition to the standard ice and ocean observational data sets. It is found that the RMSD of thin sea-ice thickness is reduced by 11 % in March and 22 % in November suggesting that SMOS-Ice has a larger impact during the beginning of freezing season. There is a slight improvement of the ice concentration and no degradation of the ocean variables. The Degrees of Freedom for Signal (DFS) indicate that the SMOS-Ice contents important information (> 20 % of the impact of all observations) for some areas in the Arctic. The areas of largest impact are the Kara Sea, the Canadian archipelago, the Baffin Bay, the Beaufort Sea and the Greenland Sea. This study suggests that SMOS-Ice is a good complementary data set that can be safely included in the TOPAZ system as it improves the ice thickness and the ice concentration but does not degrade other quantities. Keywords: SMOS-Ice; EnKF; OSE; thin sea-ice thickness; DFS;

Download Full-text

Development of the Global Sea Ice 6.0 CICE configuration for the Met Office Global Coupled model

Geoscientific Model Development ◽

10.5194/gmd-8-2221-2015 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 8 (7) ◽

pp. 2221-2230 ◽

Cited By ~ 46

Author(s):

J. G. L. Rae ◽

H. T. Hewitt ◽

A. B. Keen ◽

J. K. Ridley ◽

A. E. West ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sea Ice ◽

Coupled Model ◽

Ocean Model ◽

The Arctic ◽

Data Sets ◽

Large Reduction ◽

Sea Ice Extent ◽

Data Set ◽

The Antarctic ◽

Global Coupled Model

Abstract. The new sea ice configuration GSI6.0, used in the Met Office global coupled configuration GC2.0, is described and the sea ice extent, thickness and volume are compared with the previous configuration and with observationally based data sets. In the Arctic, the sea ice is thicker in all seasons than in the previous configuration, and there is now better agreement of the modelled concentration and extent with the HadISST data set. In the Antarctic, a warm bias in the ocean model has been exacerbated at the higher resolution of GC2.0, leading to a large reduction in ice extent and volume; further work is required to rectify this in future configurations.

Download Full-text

Sea Ice Concentration and Sea Ice Extent Mapping with L-Band Microwave Radiometry and GNSS-R Data from the FFSCat Mission Using Neural Networks

Remote Sensing ◽

10.3390/rs13061139 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (6) ◽

pp. 1139

Author(s):

David Llaveria ◽

Juan Francesc Munoz-Martin ◽

Christoph Herbert ◽

Miriam Pablos ◽

Hyuk Park ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sea Ice ◽

Microwave Radiometer ◽

Cost Effective ◽

The Arctic ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Sea Ice Extent ◽

Neural Network Approach ◽

Ice Concentration ◽

L Band ◽

Moderate Cost

CubeSat-based Earth Observation missions have emerged in recent times, achieving scientifically valuable data at a moderate cost. FSSCat is a two 6U CubeSats mission, winner of the ESA S3 challenge and overall winner of the 2017 Copernicus Masters Competition, that was launched in September 2020. The first satellite, 3Cat-5/A, carries the FMPL-2 instrument, an L-band microwave radiometer and a GNSS-Reflectometer. This work presents a neural network approach for retrieving sea ice concentration and sea ice extent maps on the Arctic and the Antarctic oceans using FMPL-2 data. The results from the first months of operations are presented and analyzed, and the quality of the retrieved maps is assessed by comparing them with other existing sea ice concentration maps. As compared to OSI SAF products, the overall accuracy for the sea ice extent maps is greater than 97% using MWR data, and up to 99% when using combined GNSS-R and MWR data. In the case of Sea ice concentration, the absolute errors are lower than 5%, with MWR and lower than 3% combining it with the GNSS-R. The total extent area computed using this methodology is close, with 2.5% difference, to those computed by other well consolidated algorithms, such as OSI SAF or NSIDC. The approach presented for estimating sea ice extent and concentration maps is a cost-effective alternative, and using a constellation of CubeSats, it can be further improved.

Download Full-text

Retrieval of Summer Sea Ice Concentration in the Pacific Arctic Ocean from AMSR2 Observations and Numerical Weather Data Using Random Forest Regression

Remote Sensing ◽

10.3390/rs13122283 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (12) ◽

pp. 2283

Author(s):

Hyangsun Han ◽

Sungjae Lee ◽

Hyun-Cheol Kim ◽

Miae Kim

Keyword(s):

Random Forest ◽

Sea Ice ◽

Arctic Ocean ◽

Open Water ◽

The Arctic ◽

Atmospheric Effects ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Air Temperatures ◽

The Pacific ◽

Ice Concentration

The Arctic sea ice concentration (SIC) in summer is a key indicator of global climate change and important information for the development of a more economically valuable Northern Sea Route. Passive microwave (PM) sensors have provided information on the SIC since the 1970s by observing the brightness temperature (TB) of sea ice and open water. However, the SIC in the Arctic estimated by operational algorithms for PM observations is very inaccurate in summer because the TB values of sea ice and open water become similar due to atmospheric effects. In this study, we developed a summer SIC retrieval model for the Pacific Arctic Ocean using Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer 2 (AMSR2) observations and European Reanalysis Agency-5 (ERA-5) reanalysis fields based on Random Forest (RF) regression. SIC values computed from the ice/water maps generated from the Korean Multi-purpose Satellite-5 synthetic aperture radar images from July to September in 2015–2017 were used as a reference dataset. A total of 24 features including the TB values of AMSR2 channels, the ratios of TB values (the polarization ratio and the spectral gradient ratio (GR)), total columnar water vapor (TCWV), wind speed, air temperature at 2 m and 925 hPa, and the 30-day average of the air temperatures from the ERA-5 were used as the input variables for the RF model. The RF model showed greatly superior performance in retrieving summer SIC values in the Pacific Arctic Ocean to the Bootstrap (BT) and Arctic Radiation and Turbulence Interaction STudy (ARTIST) Sea Ice (ASI) algorithms under various atmospheric conditions. The root mean square error (RMSE) of the RF SIC values was 7.89% compared to the reference SIC values. The BT and ASI SIC values had three times greater values of RMSE (20.19% and 21.39%, respectively) than the RF SIC values. The air temperatures at 2 m and 925 hPa and their 30-day averages, which indicate the ice surface melting conditions, as well as the GR using the vertically polarized channels at 23 GHz and 18 GHz (GR(23V18V)), TCWV, and GR(36V18V), which accounts for atmospheric water content, were identified as the variables that contributed greatly to the RF model. These important variables allowed the RF model to retrieve unbiased and accurate SIC values by taking into account the changes in TB values of sea ice and open water caused by atmospheric effects.

Download Full-text

Ice Concentration Retrieval from the Analysis of Microwaves: A New Methodology Designed for the Copernicus Imaging Microwave Radiometer

Remote Sensing ◽

10.3390/rs12071060 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 12 (7) ◽

pp. 1060 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lise Kilic ◽

Catherine Prigent ◽

Filipe Aires ◽

Georg Heygster ◽

Victor Pellet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sea Ice ◽

Spatial Resolution ◽

Microwave Radiometer ◽

Optimal Estimation ◽

Arctic Sea Ice ◽

The Arctic ◽

Special Focus ◽

Polar Regions ◽

Sea Ice Concentration ◽

Ice Concentration

Over the last 25 years, the Arctic sea ice has seen its extent decline dramatically. Passive microwave observations, with their ability to penetrate clouds and their independency to sunlight, have been used to provide sea ice concentration (SIC) measurements since the 1970s. The Copernicus Imaging Microwave Radiometer (CIMR) is a high priority candidate mission within the European Copernicus Expansion program, with a special focus on the observation of the polar regions. It will observe at 6.9 and 10.65 GHz with 15 km spatial resolution, and at 18.7 and 36.5 GHz with 5 km spatial resolution. SIC algorithms are based on empirical methods, using the difference in radiometric signatures between the ocean and sea ice. Up to now, the existing algorithms have been limited in the number of channels they use. In this study, we proposed a new SIC algorithm called Ice Concentration REtrieval from the Analysis of Microwaves (IceCREAM). It can accommodate a large range of channels, and it is based on the optimal estimation. Linear relationships between the satellite measurements and the SIC are derived from the Round Robin Data Package of the sea ice Climate Change Initiative. The 6 and 10 GHz channels are very sensitive to the sea ice presence, whereas the 18 and 36 GHz channels have a better spatial resolution. A data fusion method is proposed to combine these two estimations. Therefore, IceCREAM will provide SIC estimates with the good accuracy of the 6+10GHz combination, and the high spatial resolution of the 18+36GHz combination.

Download Full-text