MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969889942 · doi:10.1093/mnras/stt306

Analytical description of field-line random walk in Goldreich–Sridhar turbulence

2013· article· en· W1969889942 on OpenAlexaff
A. Shalchi, A. Kolly

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsTurbulenceRandom walkStatistical physicsDiffusionTensor (intrinsic definition)Limit (mathematics)Line (geometry)Field (mathematics)Magnetic fieldField lineClassical mechanicsMathematical analysisMechanicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe analytically the random walk of magnetic field lines for two correlation tensors based on the Goldreich–Sridhar model. We show that for this type of tensor, field-line wandering is normal diffusive in contrast to subdiffusive and superdiffusive transport obtained for other turbulence models. Furthermore, we demonstrate that there are two transport regimes. The first one corresponds to quasi-linear theory, whereas the second one is non-linear. We show that for one of the tensors the quasi-linear regime is obtained in the limit of strong turbulence, whereas the non-linear regime is found for weak turbulence. For the other tensor, we obtain a field-line diffusion coefficient which behaves more like diffusion parameters derived previously.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207