The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Geodetic and direct mass-balance measurements: comparison and joint analysis
Open accessAbstract
This paper describes a new compilation of both direct and geodetic mass-balance measurements, develops a procedure to reduce diverse balance measurements over different time-spans to common time-spans, and presents updated estimates of global average balance of small glaciers based on the enlarged compilation. Although geodetic measurements are fewer than direct measurements, they cover four times as many balance years. Direct and geodetic measurements are unbiased with respect to one another, but differences are often substantial. The statistical procedure can be understood by imagining that an n-year balance measurement is an average of a series of 1 year measurements. The series is hypothetical but we can calculate the uncertainty of each of its elements if, in addition to its measured average, we can also estimate its standard deviation. For this claim to be valid, the annual series must be stationary and normally distributed with independent (roughly, uncorrelated) elements, for which there is reasonable evidence. The need to know the standard deviation means that annual direct measurements from a nearby glacier, or equally reliable information about variability, are indispensable. Given this information, the new methodology results in moderately more negative balances. This is probably because tidewater glaciers are better represented in the geodetic data. In any case, the most recent published estimate of global average balance, 0.8–1.0mma–1 of sea-level equivalent for 2001–04, is now increased substantially to 1.1–1.4 mma–1 for 2001–05.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Recent contributions of glaciers and ice caps to sea level rise
Jacob, T., Wahr, J., Pfeffer, W. T., & Swenson, S. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10847 · Cited by 992
Global sea-level budget 1993–present
WCRP Global Sea Level Budget Group (2018) · Earth System Science Data · doi:10.5194/essd-10-1551-2018 · Cited by 624
A new model for global glacier change and sea-level rise
Huss, M., & Hock, R. (2015) · Frontiers in Earth Science · doi:10.3389/feart.2015.00054 · Cited by 569
Radić, V., Bliss, A., Beedlow, A. C., Hock, R., Miles, E., & Cogley, J. G. (2014) · Climate Dynamics · doi:10.1007/s00382-013-1719-7 · Cited by 455
Global response of glacier runoff to twenty‐first century climate change
Bliss, A., Hock, R., & Radić, V. (2014) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface · doi:10.1002/2013jf002931 · Cited by 329
Metadata
- Authors
- Graham Cogley, J.
- Venue
- Annals of Glaciology
- Publisher
- International Glaciological Society
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 50
- Pages
- 96-100
- ISSN
- 0260-3055 (ISSN-L)
- 1727-5644
- OpenAlex
- W2119284220
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Geodetic and direct mass-balance measurements: comparison and joint analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3189/172756409787769744
- The paper
- Graham Cogley, J. (2009). Geodetic and direct mass-balance measurements: comparison and joint analysis. Annals of Glaciology. https://doi.org/10.3189/172756409787769744
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.