MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1985689961 · doi:10.1029/2006ja012195

Electrodynamics of magnetosphere‐ionosphere coupling and feedback on magnetospheric field line resonances

2007· article· en· W1985689961 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Y. Lu, R. Rankin, R. Marchand, I. J. Rae, Wenbin Wang, S. C. Solomon, Jiuhou Lei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetosphereIonosphereAlfvén waveField lineEarth's magnetic fieldComputational physicsGeophysicsAmplitudeCoupling (piping)Quantum electrodynamicsMagnetic fieldMagnetohydrodynamicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new dynamic model that describes coupling between standing inertial or ion‐acoustic‐gyroradius‐scale shear Alfvén waves, compressional modes, and auroral density disturbances. The model is applied to the excitation of field line resonances (FLRs) in dipolar and stretched geomagnetic fields in Earth's magnetosphere. Magnetosphere‐ionosphere coupling is included by accounting for the closure of magnetospheric field‐aligned currents (FACs) through Pedersen currents in the ionosphere. A second new aspect is that the height‐integrated Pedersen conductivity is treated as a dynamic parameter by electrodynamically coupling the two‐dimensional finite element wave model “Topo” to the ionospheric ionization model “Global Airglow Model (GLOW).” We demonstrate that field line stretching brings the equatorial plasma β above unity, where the reduced MHD formulism for low‐frequency plasma breaks down. As an application of our model, we study a specific FLR event observed on 31 January 1997, when the NASA FAST satellite was over the Canadian Auroral Network for the OPEN Program Unified Study (CANOPUS) Gillam station. Using geomagnetic fields computed from the T96 magnetic field model, we show that auroral electron precipitation produces strong Pedersen conductivity enhancements that control the final amplitude and width of the excited FLR, along with the amplitude of associated density fluctuations. The predictions of the model are generally consistent with observations of this event.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations28
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics→French-language works237,207→