MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062544742 · doi:10.1029/2008ja013707

Relationship between polar cap patches and field‐aligned irregularities as observed with an all‐sky airglow imager at Resolute Bay and the PolarDARN radar at Rankin Inlet

2009· article· en· W2062544742 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keisuke Hosokawa, K. Shiokawa, Yuichi Otsuka, T. Ogawa, G. J. Sofko, D. A. Andre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayAirglowGeologyInletSkyRadarRemote sensingPolarGeodesyOceanographyMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesAstronomyGeographyPhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simultaneous two‐dimensional observations of airglow enhancement and radar backscatter from field‐aligned irregularities (FAIs) associated with polar cap patches were conducted. The spatial structure of 630 nm airglow from polar cap patches was imaged using an all‐sky airglow imager at Resolute Bay, Canada, while backscatter echoes from decameter‐scale FAIs were observed using the newly constructed HF Polar Dual Auroral Radar Network (PolarDARN) radar at Rankin Inlet, Canada. Both the airglow enhancement and the radar backscatter appeared within a structured region with the spatial extent of about 500–1000 km. The decameter‐scale FAIs were found to extend over the entire region of airglow enhancement associated with polar cap patches, indicating that the polar patch plasma became almost fully structured soon after initiation (within approximately 20–25 min). These findings imply that some rapid structuring process of the entire patch area is involved in addition to the primary gradient‐drift instabilities.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations49
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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