Transient electron precipitation during oscillatory BBF braking: THEMIS observations and theoretical estimates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms (THEMIS) data acquired on 17 March 2008 between 10:22 and 10:32 UT to study the mechanism of transient electron injection into the loss cone during oscillatory bursty bulk flow (BBF) braking. During braking, transient regions of piled‐up magnetic fluxes are formed. Perpendicular electron anisotropy observed in these regions (presumably caused by betatron perpendicular electron heating) may be a free‐energy source of coexisting whistler waves. Parallel electrons with energies between 1 and 5 keV disappear inside these regions, and transient auroral forms (both rather discrete arcs and diffuse‐like aurora around the arcs) are observed simultaneously by the ground all‐sky imager at Fort Yukon. We use quasi‐linear theory of electron resonant interaction with whistler waves and also estimate the effectiveness of electron nonlinear capture by strong whistler waves. We suggest that electron injection into the loss cone is caused by: (1) scattering by whistler waves and (2) parallel acceleration of electrons captured by stronger whistler waves.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".