MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069344965 · doi:10.1029/2008gl035727

Precipitation of radiation belt electrons by EMIC waves, observed from ground and space

2008· article· en· W2069344965 on OpenAlexaff
Yoshizumi Miyoshi, K. Sakaguchi, K. Shiokawa, David S. Evans, J. M. Albert, Martin Connors, V. K. Jordanova

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVan Allen radiation beltPhysicsElectron precipitationElectronPlasmasphereVan Allen ProbesAtomic physicsIonRelativistic particleProtonPitch angleCyclotronComputational physicsGeophysicsMagnetosphereAstrophysicsNuclear physicsPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show evidence that left‐hand polarised electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) plasma waves can cause the loss of relativistic electrons into the atmosphere. Our unique set of ground and satellite observations shows coincident precipitation of ions with energies of tens of keV and of relativistic electrons into an isolated proton aurora. The coincident precipitation was produced by wave‐particle interactions with EMIC waves near the plasmapause. The estimation of pitch angle diffusion coefficients supports that the observed EMIC waves caused coincident precipitation of both ions and relativistic electrons. This study clarifies that ions with energies of tens of keV affect the evolution of relativistic electrons in the radiation belts via cyclotron resonance with EMIC waves, an effect that was first theoretically predicted in the early 1970′s.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations309
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207