MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1624344532

AUGO II: a comprehensive subauroral zone observatory

2011· article· en· W1624344532 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ian Schofield, Martin Connors

Bibliographic record

VenueAUSpace (Athabasca University) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservatorySpace weatherSpace ScienceSpace physicsMagnetometerMeteorologySpace (punctuation)PhysicsComputer scienceAstronomyMagnetic field
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The annual fall AGU meeting is an interdisciplinary event drawing in a diverse group of people working in earth and space sciences. Our research encompasses space physics, namely electric currents and magnetic fields in space driven by the solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field that cause the aurora borealis. 
\n
\nMartin and I attended a ground based magnetometry workshop (Geospace Environment Modeling meeting -- GEM) immediately preceding the AGU meeting. This small, informal gathering brings space physics researchers who operate ground based magnetometer networks (like ourselves) up to date with current and upcoming research projects, some of which Martin may want to participate in. Of particular interest was the International Space Weather Meridian Circle Program, a Chinese initiative to build a global meridian magnetometer chain that will pass through portions of Canada. 
\n
\nI presented a poster announcing the impending construction of a new science facility to study the aurora and other related solar-terrestrial phenomena. Most questions directed to my poster dealt with the basic details of our new observatory – where it will be built, when it will be built, will it be built (an important point), and what kinds of instrumentation will it host. Only one criticism was raised that questioned the wisdom of placing an optical observatory in Alberta, given the poor (cloudy) weather we have experienced over the past year. 
\n
\nPerhaps more important is the networking aspect of attending such a high-profile conference. It is one of the few opportunities we have to meet with fellow research collaborators. For myself, it allows me to discuss some of the more technical aspects of our research activities, as well as look at new processes and technologies to further advance our research. Specifically, I met with our colleagues at UCLA who designed a web based data repository system (SPASE Tools), obtaining guidance on successfully implementing a web based virtual magnetic observatory (VMO). This is a system to share magnetic data and related metadata with similar SPASE compliant virtual observatories over the Internet. I also discussed with UCLA and others ways of expanding our metadata data set to include additional data not currently described by SPASE. This will be important once we start gathering optical and meteorological data from AUGO. From the earth and space science informatics sessions, I gathered that other research groups (particularly the Japanese IUGONET project) are expanding on the SPASE / VMO concept by developing a richer metadata dictionary (compatible with SPASE) that incorporates more diverse data types. I also had a chance to discuss with colleagues at University of Alberta our recent data sharing arrangement with the Canadian Space Science Data Portal (CSSDP). 
\n
\nThe education and public outreach sessions showed us some innovative work being done by other groups in putting optical and magnetic auroral data on the mobile web in the form of smartphone web apps. This is something that would be useful for our own observatory for science outreach and teaching, if time and manpower permits. 
\n
\nFinally, AGU is one of the few opportunities where we can meet face to face with our Japanese research colleagues who use our data and/or have instruments stationed at AUGO. This is important because the Japanese have been one of the biggest supporters (users) of the AUGO observatory. 
\n
\nWhat I have found given my attendance at two previous AGU meetings is their usefulness as networking events. The poster sessions in particular seem to be the most productive. We meet face to face with our research partners, find answers to questions (in my case, typically technical ones), and learn of new and innovative projects others in the field are doing. My main purpose was to publicize our new auroral observatory, AUGO II. The abstract is now published in the AGU scientific program, so the word is out there. As time goes on, we may find new researchers step forward wanting to know what our new facility has to offer, and hopefully partner with us.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.169 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAUSpace (Athabasca University)Same topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207