MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032494405 · doi:10.1139/p06-090

Using colour in auroral imaging

2007· article· en· W2032494405 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noora Partamies, M. Syrjäsuo, E. Donovan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagentaSubstormPhysicsPhotometerCyanRainbowRemote sensingOpticsPhotometry (optics)WavelengthField of viewAstrophysicsGeologyMagnetic fieldStars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prototype of an auroral colour camera named Rainbow was run at the Auroral Station in Adventdalen, Svalbard, Norway, during a Finnish optical campaign in February, 2004. Instead of narrow band-pass filters and grey-scale images, this imager records colour images of the aurora using four wide-band channels (a colour CCD) with the field-of-view of about 150°. In this study, we show the results of fitting the four Rainbow channels (cyan-magenta, cyan-green, yellow-magenta, yellow-green) to reconstruct the traditionally filtered auroral wavelengths: green (557.7 nm), red (630.0 nm), and blue (427.8 nm), which were simultaneously recorded by the meridian scanning photometer (MSP) at the same station. This fit is qualitatively extremely good and almost linear throughout the data. In studying the auroral evolution during substorms, there is no significant difference whether MSP or Rainbow data are used. However, due to wide-band colour channels, the background illumination has a strong effect on the Rainbow data. During low signal levels (only background or faint aurora) the reconstruction errors are larger. The data for this study were captured on 21 February 2004. The time period of interest includes a substorm sequence, which is examined using colour auroral images and data from the MSP. PACS No.: 94.20.Ac

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207