Determination of the substorm initiation region from a major conjunction interval of THEMIS satellites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate in detail the time history of substorm disturbances in the magnetotail observed during a major tail conjunction of Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms (THEMIS) satellites on 29 January 2008, 0700–0900 UT. During this interval, all THEMIS satellites were closely aligned along the tail axis near midnight and were bracketed in local time by GOES 11 and 12. The radial distance covered ranges from the geosynchronous altitude to ∼30 RE in the tail. This interval consists of three activations detected by the THEMIS satellites with good ground all‐sky‐camera observations of auroral activity. The first activation is a small substorm with spatially limited disturbance in the tail. The onset arc was equatorward of an undisturbed arc. The second activation is a moderate size substorm with the onset arc also being equatorward of an undisturbed arc. The third activation is an intensification of the substorm with its onset indicated by the second activation. The active auroral arc for this intensification was near the poleward boundary of the auroral oval. Analysis of these observations indicates that the first activation is a small substorm initiated in the near‐Earth plasma sheet and does not involve magnetic reconnection of open magnetic field lines. Magnetic reconnection on closed field lines can be ruled out for this substorm because it cannot generate the observed high‐speed plasma flow. The second and third activations are part of a moderate size substorm initiated also in the near‐Earth plasma sheet, with a subsequent substorm intensification involving activity initiated tailward of ∼30 RE. Overall, the time history of substorm activity for these two substorms is consistent with the near‐Earth initiation model.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".