MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036602904 · doi:10.5194/angeo-22-3625-2004

The location of the open-closed magnetic field line boundary in the dawn sector auroral ionosphere

2004· article· en· W2036602904 on OpenAlexfundno aff
J. A. Wild, S. E. Milan, C. J. Owen, J. M. Bosqued, M. Lester, D. M. Wright, H. U. Frey, C. W. Carlson, A. N. Fazakerley, H. Rème

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales Geophysicae · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAir Force Research LaboratoryCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsIonosphereGeophysicsMagnetospherePolarPhysicsDoppler effectInterplanetary magnetic fieldGeologyGeodesyComputational physicsSolar windAtmospheric sciencesMagnetic fieldAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. As a measure of the degree of coupling between the solar wind-magnetosphere-ionosphere systems, the rate at which the size of the polar cap (the region corresponding to ionospheric termini of open magnetic flux tubes) varies is of prime importance. However, a reliable technique by which the extent of the polar cap might be routinely monitored has yet to be developed. Current techniques provide particularly ambiguous indications of the polar cap boundary in the dawn sector. We present a case study of space- and ground-based observations of the dawn-sector auroral zone and attempt to determine the location of the polar cap boundary using multi-wavelength observations of the ultraviolet aurora (made by the IMAGE FUV imager), precipitating particle measurements (recorded by the FAST, DMSP, and Cluster 1 and 3 satellites), and SuperDARN HF radar observations of the ionospheric Doppler spectral width boundary. We conclude that in the dawn sector, during the interval presented, neither the poleward edge of the wideband auroral UV emission (140-180nm) nor the Doppler spectral width boundary were trustworthy indicators of the polar cap boundary location, while narrow band UV emissions in the range 130-140nm appear to be much more reliable.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations30
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales GeophysicaeSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207