MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026617310 · doi:10.1029/2000ja003004

Observation of the magnetospheric “sash” and its implications relative to solar‐wind/magnetospheric coupling: A multisatellite event analysis

2001· article· en· W2026617310 on OpenAlexaff
N. C. Maynard, S. Savin, G. M. Erickson, Hideaki Kawano, Zdeněk Němeček, W. K. Peterson, J. Šafránoková, I. Sandahl, J. D. Scudder, G. L. Siscoe, B. U. Ö. Sonnerup, D. R. Weimer, W. W. White, G. R. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetopauseMagnetosheathPhysicsGeophysicsField lineSolar windMagnetic reconnectionIonosphereMagnetosphereEarth's magnetic fieldPlasma sheetPlasmaMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a unique data set from the Wind, Polar, Interball 1, Magion 4, and Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) F11 satellites, comparisons with the Integrated Space Weather Model (ISM) have provided validation of the global structure predicted by the ISM model, which in turn has allowed us to use the model to interpret the data to further understand boundary layers and magnetospheric processes. The comparisons have shown that the magnetospheric “sash” [White et al., 1998], a region of low magnetic field discovered by the MHD modeling which extends along the high‐latitude flank of the magnetopause, is related to the turbulent boundary layer on the high‐latitude magnetopause, recently mapped by Interball 1. The sash in the data and in the model has rotational discontinuity properties, expected for a reconnection site. At some point near or behind the terminator, the sash becomes a site for reconnection of open field lines, which were previously opened by merging on the dayside. This indicates that significant reconnection in the magnetotail occurs on the flanks. Polar mapped to the high‐density extension of the sash into the tilted plasma sheet. The source of the magnetosheath plasma observed by Polar on closed field lines behind the terminator was plasma entry through the low field connection of the sash to the central plasma sheet. The Polar magnetic field line footprints in each hemisphere are moving in different directions. Above and below the tilted plasma sheet the flows in the model are consistent with the corresponding flows in the ionosphere. The turbulence in the plasma sheet allows the convection patterns from each hemisphere to adjust. The boundary layer in the equatorial plane on the flank for this interplanetary magnetic field BY condition, which is below the tilted central plasma sheet, is several RE thick and is on tailward flowing open field lines. This thick boundary layer shields the magnetopause from viscous forces and must be driven by magnetic tension. Above the plasma sheet the boundary layer is dominated by the sash, and the model indicates that the open region inside the sash is considerably thinner.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.315
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 designObservational
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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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