MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017990209 · doi:10.1029/2003ja010168

Open‐closed field line boundary position: A parametric study using an MHD model

2004· article· en· W2017990209 on OpenAlexaff
К. Кабин, R. Rankin, G. Rostoker, R. Marchand, I. J. Rae, A. J. Ridley, T. I. Gombosi, C. R. Clauer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMagnetohydrodynamicsInterplanetary magnetic fieldSolar windTilt (camera)Field lineHeliospherePosition (finance)GeophysicsGeodesyMagnetic fieldAstrophysicsGeologyGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we investigate the effect of changes in the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), solar wind dynamic pressure, and dipole tilt angle on the position of the ionospheric projection of the open‐closed field line boundary (OCB) in a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) model. We carry out a large number of steady state global MHD simulations in order to parameterize the OCB as a function of the solar wind B y and B z which we find to have the largest effect on the OCB location. We interpolate between the values produced by the simulations, which allows us to evaluate the location of the OCB projection into the ionosphere for any values of ∣ B y ∣ < 10 nT and ∣ B z ∣ < 10 nT. It is found that, particularly on the nightside, the OCB position is very sensitive to changes in the northward IMF component B z , but it is much less sensitive to changes in B z when it is southward. The response of the OCB location to changes in B y also depends greatly on whether B z is northward or southward, being much larger in situations in which B z > 0 nT. We also find that the polar cap area increases with the increasing solar wind dynamic pressure. The B x component of the IMF and the dipole tilt angle are found to have relatively small effects on the location of the OCB.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations55
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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