MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048507003 · doi:10.1209/0295-5075/88/19002

About the world-wide magnetic-background noise in the millihertz frequency range

2009· article· en· W2048507003 on OpenAlexaff
J. Marfaing, John J. Du Bois, R. Blancon, E. Pozzo di Borgo, G. Waysand, Stéphane Gaffet, M. Yedlin, Pierre Barroy, M. Auguste, D. Boyer, A. Cavaillou

Bibliographic record

VenueEurophysics Letters (EPL) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetometerPhysicsNoise (video)Magnetic fieldQuake (natural phenomenon)ToroidComputational physicsWavelengthSchumann resonancesRange (aeronautics)IonosphereAcousticsOpticsMaterials scienceGeophysicsAstronomyPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the millihertz range, a single magnetometer can detect magnetic waves in the near-field regime. For such long wavelengths, it can measure the world-wide magnetic-background noise due to any charge displacement on Earth and within its environment. In this frequency band, the normal modes of the Earth's free oscillations exist and when excited, they shake the air column above them, up to the ionosphere where the moving charges emit a magnetic fluctuation, via Ampère's law. We show the magnetic-background noise spectrum obtained by an FFT analysis of 72 consecutive hours of magnetic-seismic calm. It is mostly due to vertical charge oscillations. Even in the absence of a quake larger than M w = 5.2, spherical and toroidal modes are deected. Instrumental and analytical perspectives are discussed.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurophysics Letters (EPL)Same topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207