Equatorward expansion of the westward electrojet during magnetically disturbed periods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The auroral electrojet (AE) indices have widely been used in various fields of solar terrestrial physics since their introduction to the community. Recently, it has been reported that the AE indices do not, at times, properly monitor the auroral electrojets because as magnetic activity increases, they expand equatorward beyond the standard AE network, resulting in a serious underestimation of the auroral electrojet intensity. It is particularly the case during severe geomagnetic storms. To determine quantitatively the equatorial expansion of the auroral electrojets, we examined an extensive database obtained from the Alaska, International Monitor for Auroral Geomagnetic Effects (IMAGE), and Canadian Auroral Network for the OPEN Program Unified Study chain of magnetometers. These chains of magnetometers enable us to determine the latitude where the maximum current density of the auroral electrojet flows. It is generally understood that the center of the auroral electrojet tends to migrate equatorward with an increase in magnetic activity. We note, however, that there seems to be a lower limit particularly of the westward electrojet, ∼60° in corrected geomagnetic latitude, regardless of magnetic activity levels. The relative location of the westward electrojet with respect to the global auroral image taken from the Polar satellite is also examined. Contrary to the generally accepted notion, the auroral electrojets are found to be most intense not in the region of bright auroral luminosity but slightly poleward of it in less luminous region. The current center seems to be the region where both ionospheric conductivity and electric field become significantly high.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".