MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1827973530 · doi:10.1002/grl.50635

Direct auroral precipitation from the magnetotail during substorms

2013· article· en· W1827973530 on OpenAlexaff
M. Ashour‐Abdalla, D. Schriver, M. El‐Alaoui, R. L. Richard, R. J. Walker, M. L. Goldstein, E. Donovan, Meng Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsSubstormElectron precipitationElectronPhysicsPrecipitationEarth's magnetic fieldGeophysicsAtmospheric sciencesPitch angleMagnetosphereComputational physicsMagnetic fieldMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, we examine the causes of electron precipitation during a substorm on 15 February 2008 that lead to auroral brightening. We use global kinetic simulations along with spacecraft and ground‐based data. We find ~keV electrons in the region modeled in the simulation precipitate into the premidnight sector at latitudes between 71° and 75° due to two distinct physical processes: (1) higher latitude precipitation due to electrons that undergo relatively rapid non‐adiabatic pitch angle scattering into the loss cone just earthward of a reconnection region, and (2) lower latitude precipitation due to electrons that are more gradually accelerated primarily parallel to the geomagnetic field by Fermi acceleration. These latter electrons enter the loss cone much closer to Earth at ~−15 to −10 RE. The electron precipitation due to the combination of these two mechanisms coincides spatially with observed auroral brightening during the disturbed event.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics→French-language works237,207→