Response of the equatorial and low‐latitude ionosphere to an intense X‐class solar flare (X7/2B) as observed on 09 August 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we present response of equatorial and low‐latitude ionosphere to an intense solar flare of class X7/2B that peaked at 08:05 UT on 09 August 2011 in the solar cycle 24. Global positioning system total electron content (TEC) observations in the sunlit hemisphere show enhancement of ~3 TEC units, while geomagnetic H component observations indicate sudden decrease and increase in their strength at equatorial and low‐latitude stations, respectively, at several stations in the sunlit hemisphere. In addition, equatorial electrojet strength over Indian region reveals commencement of counter electrojet. Simultaneous Canadian Advanced Digital Ionosonde observations at Tirunelveli, an equatorial station in India, show the disappearance of ionogram echoes during the flare event indicating absorption of radio signals in the D region. Strong equatorial blanketing type E s layer was observed in the ionogram records at Tirunelveli prior to the occurrence of the solar flare that continued for several hours though it became weak/absent during the flare event. Ionogram records on the control day show regular F layer movement without any blanketing type E s layer. Very low frequency (VLF) observations at Allahabad, an Indian low‐latitude station, show enhanced VLF amplitude signal during the same time revealing the sudden enhancement of D region ionization. Using the observations presented here, an attempt has been made to study the impact of the solar flares on the electrodynamics of the equatorial and low‐latitude ionosphere.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".