STARE velocities: the importance of off-orthogonality and ion motions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. A 3.5-h morning event of joint EISCAT/STARE observations is considered and the differences between the observed STARE velocities and the electron drift components (EISCAT) are studied. We find that the STARE-Finland radar velocity was larger than the EISCAT convec-tion component for a prolonged period of time. In addition, a moderate 5–20° offset between the EISCAT convection azimuth and the corresponding STARE estimate was observed. We show that both the STARE-Finland radar velocity "over-speed" and the offset in the azimuth can be explained by fluid plasma theory, if the ion drift contribution to the irregularity phase velocity is taken into account under the condition of a moderate backscatter off-orthogonality. We call such an explanation the off-orthogonal fluid approach (OOFA). In general terms, we found that the azimuth of the maxi-mum irregularity phase velocity Vph is not collinear with the VE × B electron flow direction, but differs by 5–15°. Such an azimuth offset is the key factor, not only for the explanation of the Finland velocity overspeed, but also for the revisions of the velocity cosine rule, traditionally accepted in the STARE method at large flow angles. We argue that such a rule is only a rough approximation. The application of the OOFA to the STARE l-o-s velocities gives a reasonable agreement with the EISCAT convection data, implying that ion motions and the non-orthogonality of backscatter are important to consider for VHF auroral echoes. The data set discussed had the STARE velocity magnitudes, which were 1.5–2 times smaller than the electron VE × B velocities, as was found earlier by Nielsen and Schlegel (1983).Key words. Ionospheric irregularities; plasma waves and instabilities; auroral ionosphere
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 | 0.000 | 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".