MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982201004 · doi:10.1029/2010ja015365

Data‐derived spatiotemporal resolution constraints for global auroral imagers

2010· article· en· W1982201004 on OpenAlexafffund
V. M. Uritsky, E. Donovan, T. Trondsen, Deanna Pineau, B. V. Kozelov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsScalingNormalization (sociology)Image resolutionPhysicsSpacecraftPolarPower lawRemote sensingTemporal resolutionData setGeophysicsGeologyComputer scienceOpticsAstronomyArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present new data‐derived constraints on spatiotemporal resolution of global auroral imagers. The reported results are based on an extensive set of images from two previously flown instruments, POLAR UVI and IMAGE WIC, processed using the event detection methodology developed by Uritsky et al. (2002, 2003, 2006). We use the cross‐scale analysis of ground‐based and spacecraft observations of auroral emission regions by Kozelov et al. (2004) to derive the power law exponent relating spatial and temporal scales of auroral precipitation events, and estimate the normalization factor entering this relation using the satellite data. Our results show the existence of a nontrivial scaling relation between the relaxation time and the spatial dimension of auroral emission events. We use this relation as a proxi to the resolution scaling function providing non‐redundant combinations of spatial and temporal resolution of an optimized auroral imager consistent with the dynamics of multiscale auroral precipitation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207