- Award ID(s):
- 2026962
- PAR ID:
- 10471120
- Publisher / Repository:
- IEEE
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- IGARSS 2023 - 2023 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium
- ISBN:
- 979-8-3503-2010-7
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 145 to 148
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Pasadena, CA, USA
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Physics-based simulations of Arctic sea ice are highly complex, involving transport between different phases, length scales, and time scales. Resultantly, numerical simulations of sea ice dynamics have a high computational cost and model uncertainty. We employ data-driven machine learning (ML) to make predictions of sea ice motion. The ML models are built to predict present-day sea ice velocity given present-day wind velocity and previous-day sea ice concentration and velocity. Models are trained using reanalysis winds and satellite-derived sea ice properties. We compare the predictions of three different models: persistence (PS), linear regression (LR), and a convolutional neural network (CNN). We quantify the spatiotemporal variability of the correlation between observations and the statistical model predictions. Additionally, we analyze model performance in comparison to variability in properties related to ice motion (wind velocity, ice velocity, ice concentration, distance from coast, bathymetric depth) to understand the processes related to decreases in model performance. Results indicate that a CNN makes skillful predictions of daily sea ice velocity with a correlation up to 0.81 between predicted and observed sea ice velocity, while the LR and PS implementations exhibit correlations of 0.78 and 0.69, respectively. The correlation varies spatially and seasonally: lower values occur in shallow coastal regions and during times of minimum sea ice extent. LR parameter analysis indicates that wind velocity plays the largest role in predicting sea ice velocity on 1-day time scales, particularly in the central Arctic. Regions where wind velocity has the largest LR parameter are regions where the CNN has higher predictive skill than the LR.more » « less
-
Abstract. Arctic sea ice experiences a dramatic annual cycle, and seasonal ice loss and growth can be characterized by various metrics: melt onset, breakup, opening, freeze onset, freeze-up, and closing. By evaluating a range of seasonal sea ice metrics, CMIP6 sea ice simulations can be evaluated in more detail than by using traditional metrics alone, such as sea ice area. We show that models capture the observed asymmetry in seasonal sea ice transitions, with spring ice loss taking about 1–2 months longer than fall ice growth. The largest impacts of internal variability are seen in the inflow regions for melt and freeze onset dates, but all metrics show pan-Arctic model spreads exceeding the internal variability range, indicating the contribution of model differences. Through climate model evaluation in the context of both observations and internal variability, we show that biases in seasonal transition dates can compensate for other unrealistic aspects of simulated sea ice. In some models, this leads to September sea ice areas in agreement with observations for the wrong reasons.more » « less
-
Abstract The predictability of sea ice during extreme sea ice loss events on subseasonal (daily to weekly) time scales is explored in dynamical forecast models. These extreme sea ice loss events (defined as the 5th percentile of the 5-day change in sea ice extent) exhibit substantial regional and seasonal variability; in the central Arctic Ocean basin, most subseasonal rapid ice loss occurs in the summer, but in the marginal seas rapid sea ice loss occurs year-round. Dynamical forecast models are largely able to capture the seasonality of these extreme sea ice loss events. In most regions in the summertime, sea ice forecast skill is lower on extreme sea ice loss days than on nonextreme days, despite evidence that links these extreme events to large-scale atmospheric patterns; in the wintertime, the difference between extreme and nonextreme days is less pronounced. In a damped anomaly forecast benchmark estimate, the forecast error remains high following extreme sea ice loss events and does not return to typical error levels for many weeks; this signal is less robust in the dynamical forecast models but still present. Overall, these results suggest that sea ice forecast skill is generally lower during and after extreme sea ice loss events and also that, while dynamical forecast models are capable of simulating extreme sea ice loss events with similar characteristics to what we observe, forecast skill from dynamical models is limited by biases in mean state and variability and errors in the initialization. Significance Statement We studied weather model forecasts of changes in Arctic sea ice extent on day-to-day time scales in different regions and seasons. We were especially interested in extreme sea ice loss days, or days in which sea ice melts very quickly or is reduced due to diverging forces such as winds, ocean currents, and waves. We find that forecast models generally capture the observed timing of extreme sea ice loss days. We also find that forecasts of sea ice extent are worse on extreme sea ice loss days compared to typical days, and that forecast errors remain elevated following extreme sea ice loss events.more » « less
-
Over the last half century, the Arctic sea ice cover has declined dramatically. Current estimates suggest that, for the Arctic as a whole, nearly one-half of the observed loss of summer sea ice cover is not due to anthropogenic forcing but rather is due to internal variability. Using the 40 members of the Community Earth System Model Large Ensemble (CESM-LE), our analysis provides the first regional assessment of the role of internal variability on the observed sea ice loss. The CESM-LE is one of the best available models for such an analysis, because it performs better than other CMIP5 models for many metrics of importance. Our study reveals that the local contribution of internal variability has a large range and strongly depends on the month and region in question. We find that the pattern of internal variability is highly nonuniform over the Arctic, with internal variability accounting for less than 10% of late summer (August–September) East Siberian Sea sea ice loss but more than 60% of the Kara Sea sea ice loss. In contrast, spring (April–May) sea ice loss, notably in the Barents Sea, has so far been dominated by internal variability.
-
Sea ice surface patterns encode more information than can be represented solely by the ice fraction. The aim of this paper is thus to establish the importance of using a broader set of surface characterization metrics, and to identify a minimal set of such metrics that may be useful for representing sea-ice in Earth System Models. Large-eddy simulations of the atmospheric boundary layer over various idealized sea ice surface patterns, with equivalent ice fraction and average floe area, demonstrate that the spatial organization of ice and water can play a crucial role in determining boundary-layer structure. Thus, different methods to quantify heterogeneity in categorical lattice spatial data, such as those done in landscape ecology and Geographic Information System (GIS) studies, are used here on a set of high-resolution, recently-declassified sea ice surface images. It is found that, in conjunction with ice fraction, the patch density (representing the fragmentation of the surface), the splitting index (representing the variability in patch size), and perimeter-area fractal dimension (representing the tortuosity of the interface) are all required to describe the two-dimensional pattern exhibited by a sea ice surface. Furthermore, for surfaces with anisotropic patterns, the orientation of the surface relative to the mean wind is needed. Furthermore, scaling laws are derived for these relevant landscape metrics to estimate them from aggregated spatial sea ice surface data at any resolution. The methods used and results gained from this study are a first step towards further development of methods to quantify the variability of non-binary surfaces, and for parameterizing mixed ice-water surfaces in coarse geophysical models.more » « less