MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988373644 · doi:10.1029/2004eo190010

What is the physical meaning of the AE index?

2004· article· en· W1988373644 on OpenAlexaff
Y. Kamide, G. Rostoker

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrojetIonosphereMagnetosphereEarth's magnetic fieldIndex (typography)Geomagnetic stormMeaning (existential)PhysicsTerm (time)GeophysicsAtmospheric sciencesAstrophysicsMagnetic fieldComputer sciencePhilosophyAstronomyEpistemologyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We would like to propose ceasing the derivation and distribution of the AE (Auroral electrojet) index because AE has no physically interpretable meaning and is therefore of no scientific value. Note that the term “ AE indices” is different from the term “ AE index;” the former includes the AU and AL indices, whereas the latter is just the AE index itself. (See below for the definition of AU and AL .) Since the introduction of the AE indices by Davis and Sugiura [1966], scientists have relied on the indices to monitor the level of geomagnetic disturbance resulting from the auroral electrojets and hence, by proxy, to specify the state of the magnetosphere and the ionosphere. The AE index was defined by the separation between the upper and lower envelopes of the superposed H component plots from auroral‐zone magnetic observatories. The upper and lower envelopes were defined as the AU and AL indices, respectively Thus, there is the relationship given by AE = AU ‐ AL .

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.021
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations42
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207