MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059450284 · doi:10.1029/2009ja014263

Spatial distribution of average vorticity in the high‐latitude ionosphere and its variation with interplanetary magnetic field direction and season

2009· article· en· W2059450284 on OpenAlexaff
G. Chisham, M. P. Freeman, Gary Abel, W. A. Bristow, A. Marchaudon, J. M. Ruohoniemi, G. J. Sofko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersGoddard Space Flight Center
KeywordsIonosphereVorticityInterplanetary magnetic fieldEarth's magnetic fieldPhysicsGeophysicsGeologyAtmospheric sciencesMagnetic fieldMeteorologyVortexSolar wind

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a technique to measure the magnetic field‐aligned vorticity of mesoscale plasma flows in the F region ionosphere using line‐of‐sight velocity measurements made by the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN). Vorticity is often used as a proxy for magnetic field‐aligned current (FAC) intensity in the ionosphere but also provides information about turbulent processes in the ionosphere and magnetosphere. Using 6 years (2000–2005 inclusive) of vorticity measurements made by six SuperDARN radars in the Northern Hemisphere, we have compiled, for the first time, maps of average vorticity across the northern polar ionosphere. These maps have been subdivided according to different seasonal and interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) conditions. The variations in the morphology of the vorticity maps with IMF direction match very closely those seen in maps of average FAC intensity (determined using different methods and instrumentation), suggesting that vorticity is a good proxy for FAC in an averaged sense. The variations in the morphology of the vorticity maps with season show differences from those seen in the FAC maps, illustrating that ionospheric conductance plays a major role in determining the differences between measurements of vorticity and FAC.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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