The influence of asymmetric ionospheric Pedersen conductances on the field‐aligned phase variation of guided toroidal and guided poloidal Alfvén waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerical solutions of the decoupled guided toroidal and guided poloidal Alfvén wave equations in a dipole field with finite asymmetric ionospheric Pedersen conductances are used to illustrate how energy propagates along the geomagnetic field lines and into the ionosphere. We show that weakly damped second harmonic guided toroidal and guided poloidal waves can have electric and magnetic fields which are either in phase or 180° out of phase, exactly like those of traveling waves, at specific points along the magnetic field line. We show that the direction in which these locally traveling waves propagate energy is not determined by the closest ionosphere. Instead, it is dependent on the position along the field line where the time‐integrated Poynting flux is zero (called the “null point”), and this can result in energy propagating away from the closest ionosphere counter to what might be intuitively expected. We present results which illustrate how the position along the field line of the Poynting flux null point varies as a function of the ionospheric Pedersen conductivity and show that guided toroidal and guided poloidal modes in general can have null points at different positions along the field line. Importantly, we show that it is possible for the guided toroidal and guided poloidal waves to locally behave like counterpropagating traveling waves at a specific point along the magnetic field line. Our solutions are compared with the properties of a ULF wave observed by the Polar satellite and ground‐based Canadian Open Network for the OPEN Program Unified Study (CANOPUS) magnetometers. We illustrate how our results can be critically important for correctly inferring the traveling or standing nature of waves from satellite observations at a single point along the field line.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".