MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1787109172 · doi:10.1002/jgra.50311

Localized dayside proton aurora at high latitudes

2013· article· en· W1787109172 on OpenAlexaff
C. R. Bryant, K. A. McWilliams, H. U. Frey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolar windPolarInterplanetary magnetic fieldField linePhysicsEarth's magnetic fieldMagnetopauseLatitudeGeophysicsMagnetic reconnectionProtonSubstormAstrophysicsAstronomyMagnetosphereMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two types of dayside localized proton‐induced auroral emissions on the dayside were identified in SI12 images from the Imager for Magnetopause‐to‐Aurora Global Exploration (IMAGE) spacecraft. “Auroral oval spots” occurred at or toward the poleward edge of the dayside proton auroral oval. “Polar cap spots” occurred well into the polar cap. The polar cap spots occurred when the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) was strongly northward and radially aligned along the Sun‐Earth line, which results in reconnection with northern lobe field lines. For the auroral oval spots that occurred during northward‐IMF only, there was a large azimuthal component of the IMF. During northward IMF conditions, a large azimuthal component of the IMF leads to reconnection at high latitudes on closed geomagnetic field lines. The reconnection site would map closer to auroral oval latitudes, which is consistent with the location of the auroral oval spots. The auroral oval spots were found to be much larger in size and total intensity than the polar cap spots, but the average intensities of the two types of spots were comparable. The average intensity of the auroral oval spots was proportional to the solar wind dynamic pressure and solar wind density, suggesting that the average intensity of the auroral oval spots is dependent on the number of protons precipitating from the reconnection site, rather than the proton energy. No clear trend was found for the polar cap spots, but there was a notable lack of polar cap spots for high solar wind dynamic pressures and densities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207