2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2018.03.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Revealing recent calving activity of a tidewater glacier with terrestrial LiDAR reflection intensity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, most of these studies rely on indirect methods (measuring a quantity that is then used to infer the volume) (O'Neel et al, 2010;Walter et al, 2010;Bartholomaus et al, 2012;Glowacki et al, 2015) or discontinuous (Warren et al, 1995;O'Neel et al, 2003) measurements and thus lack continuous direct observations of calving event sizes. Promising direct methods (measuring directly the volume) for determining calving event sizes are repeated surveys by photogrammetry using Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) data (Ryan et al, 2015;Jouvet et al, 2017Jouvet et al, , 2019 and by terrestrial laser scanning (Petlicki and Kinnard, 2016;Podgórski et al, 2018). For high calving activity these methods tend to miss individual events due to limited temporal resolution and their dependency on suitable weather conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, most of these studies rely on indirect methods (measuring a quantity that is then used to infer the volume) (O'Neel et al, 2010;Walter et al, 2010;Bartholomaus et al, 2012;Glowacki et al, 2015) or discontinuous (Warren et al, 1995;O'Neel et al, 2003) measurements and thus lack continuous direct observations of calving event sizes. Promising direct methods (measuring directly the volume) for determining calving event sizes are repeated surveys by photogrammetry using Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) data (Ryan et al, 2015;Jouvet et al, 2017Jouvet et al, , 2019 and by terrestrial laser scanning (Petlicki and Kinnard, 2016;Podgórski et al, 2018). For high calving activity these methods tend to miss individual events due to limited temporal resolution and their dependency on suitable weather conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Time‐lapse cameras, whilst having sufficient temporal resolution, produce two‐dimensional imagery that is not easily converted into three‐dimensional (3D) volumes of calving events (How et al., 2018; Mallalieu et al., 2017; Vallot et al., 2019). Terrestrial laser scanning has been used (Pętlicki & Kinnard, 2016; Podgórski et al., 2018), but repeat surveys with this technique are problematic due to the large quantity of data in each survey, as well as the significant logistical effort required and the relatively short range of the instrument. Continuous and detailed data sets on calving behavior at tidewater glaciers are thus lacking, yet understanding this process is crucial for advancing numerical models and for better prediction of tidewater‐glacier behavior and consequent sea‐level rise.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, they are independent of visibility conditions in contrast to optical methods. However, inferring ice volumes from those signals using physical models is challenging (Podolskiy and Walter, 2016;Aster and Winberry, 2017). For example, it requires different approaches dependent on the calving style, i.e., for glacial earthquake signals from buoyancydriven nontabular iceberg calving such as observed in Greenland (e.g., Murray et al, 2015;Sergeant et al, 2019) or for seismic calving signals generated during iceberg-sea or lake surface interactions (Bartholomaus et al, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%