MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1746269545 · doi:10.1002/2014ja019930

Quantified energy dissipation rates in the terrestrial bow shock: 2. Waves and dissipation

2014· article· en· W1746269545 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsDissipationMagnetosheathWhistlerBow waveBow shock (aerodynamics)Shock waveComputational physicsMechanical waveWave propagationLongitudinal waveAtomic physicsMechanicsSolar windElectronPlasmaOpticsMagnetopauseNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present the first quantified measure of the energy dissipation rates, due to wave‐particle interactions, in the transition region of the Earth's collisionless bow shock using data from the Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms spacecraft. Our results show that wave‐particle interactions can regulate the global structure and dominate the energy dissipation of collisionless shocks. In every bow shock crossing examined, we observed both low‐frequency (<10 Hz) and high‐frequency ( 10 Hz) electromagnetic waves throughout the entire transition region and into the magnetosheath. The low‐frequency waves were consistent with magnetosonic‐whistler waves. The high‐frequency waves were combinations of ion‐acoustic waves, electron cyclotron drift instability driven waves, electrostatic solitary waves, and whistler mode waves. The high‐frequency waves had the following: (1) peak amplitudes exceeding δ B ∼ 10 nT and δ E ∼ 300 mV/m, though more typical values were δ B ∼ 0.1–1.0 nT and δ E ∼ 10–50 mV/m; (2) Poynting fluxes in excess of 2000 μW m −2 (typical values were ∼1–10 μW m −2 ); (3) resistivities > 9000 Ω m; and (4) associated energy dissipation rates >10 μW m −3 . The dissipation rates due to wave‐particle interactions exceeded rates necessary to explain the increase in entropy across the shock ramps for ∼90% of the wave burst durations. For ∼22% of these times, the wave‐particle interactions needed to only be ≤ 0.1% efficient to balance the nonlinear wave steepening that produced the shock waves. These results show that wave‐particle interactions have the capacity to regulate the global structure and dominate the energy dissipation of collisionless shocks.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.298 · 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