Characteristics of high energy cosmic ray diurnal anisotropy on day-to-day basis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diurnal variation of cosmic ray intensity for the period of 1989 to 2000 at Kiel, Haleakakla, Rome, Hermanus, Calgary, and Goose Bay neutron monitors has been studied. Frequency histograms are generated for each year by using the daily values of amplitudes and phases. In the present analysis we have derived the yearly mean amplitude and phase of the diurnal variation of cosmic ray intensity. It has been concluded from the analysis that the diurnal amplitude is mostly concentrated in between the amplitude values of 0.1% and 0.4%, whereas the phase of diurnal anisotropy is concentrated in the belt of 100 to 225 degrees. As such, the various characteristics of long-term diurnal variation of cosmic ray intensity for the maxima of solar activity cycle 22 to the next maxima of solar activity cycle 23 have been studied. The minimum amplitudes are apparent for the minimum solar activity periods starting from 1995 and up to 1997 at Kiel, Haleakakla, Rome, Hermanus, Calgary and Goose Bay stations. The diurnal amplitude has been found to have almost recovered to its values observed during 1989 to 1990. It is also seen that the diurnal amplitudes are much larger by a factor of two at high/middle latitude stations as compared to that for low latitude stations, where the amplitudes are even ∼01% or less during 1996. The phase is significantly earlier during 1996 and 1997 with some significant change starting in 1995. As such, competitive is a continuous decreasing trend in the diurnal phase with smaller change at high/middle latitude and significantly much larger change at low latitudes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".