how closely did you read this article? I did, but I have the impression you didn't really or not closely
would you mind making a summary of the most important points (on what points the study agrees or contradicts other studies? how soon the lead author of your study expects the losses to be greater than the gains, compensated for the year of publication? does he have an explanation for the mismatch? or does he concede precisely measuring the height by satellite altimeter may be in error? when will a satellite with better height resolution be launched?)
different measurement methods are giving conflicting results.
increased snowfall may cause observable localized increases that add up over time, but that does not necessarily mean the ice sheet is thickening: water expands when forming ice, so pressure from increased weight of snow can melt the bottom layer of ice where pressure is highest.
I don't necessarily see a contradiction between the observations
Looking at a glance, one could mistakenly assume the ice loss slowed down (as I did initially)