Dependence of magnetopause erosion on southward interplanetary magnetic field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On May 4, 1998, the Wind and ACE satellites observed a period of extremely strong southward interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) followed by a period of highly variable IMF. The magnetopause moved inside the geosynchronous orbit, exposing Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) geosynchronous satellites and Polar to the magnetosheath. In a simple model the magnetopause erosion may be linearly proportional to the magnitude of southward IMF. A careful comparison of the predictions derived from various magnetopause location models to the in situ observations indicates a nonlinear dependence of the magnetopause erosion on IMF Bz. The observations from the Wind and ACE satellites are significantly different in the period of highly variable IMF. The predictions based on the ACE solar wind data are more consistent with the LANL observations than those based on the Wind solar wind data. The positions of the satellites show that ACE and LANL were mainly on the same side of the Sun‐Earth meridian plane. However, for the Polar observations the predictions based on the Wind data are better than those based on the ACE data. Wind and Polar were on the same side of the equatorial plane. These results suggest that we choose a solar wind monitor that is on the same side of the meridian or equatorial plane as the magnetospheric satellite for better predictions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".