MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070998465 · doi:10.1029/2002jd002440

The quasi 2‐day wave observed in the polar mesosphere

2003· article· en· W2070998465 on OpenAlexafffund
Satonori Nozawa, S. Imaida, A. Brekke, Chris Hall, A. H. Manson, C. E. Meek, Shin‐ichiro Oyama, Kazuhito Dobashi, Ryoichi Fujii

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSolsticeMesosphereThermosphereAmplitudeAtmospheric sciencesZonal and meridionalPolarPolar nightLatitudeEnvironmental scienceGeologyGeodesyClimatologyIonospherePhysicsGeophysicsStratosphereAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using MF radar data obtained at Tromsø (69.6°N, 19.2°E) for ∼37 months between 1 November 1998 and 8 December 2001, we have examined characteristics of the quasi 2‐day wave (Q2DW) in the polar mesosphere in the height range from 70 to 91 km. The activity of the Q2DW is higher in winter months (November–February) than in summer months (May–August) over this height region. The maximum values of the amplitude are ∼25 m s −1 in winter and ∼15 m s −1 in summer. Between 70 and 82 km, the amplitude appears to maximize near winter solstice over the 3 years. The average ratio of meridional to zonal amplitudes is ∼1.1–1.2 over the height region. Thus, there is no significant preference towards either components. The variations of the periods of maximum amplitude are also examined, and periods with 45.2 and 54.9 hours occur more frequently than those with 48.0 and 51.2 hours. However, no clear seasonal trend of the variation of the period is found. In addition, the amplitude is modulated at 4–10 day rate. With simultaneous observational data from the MF radar and the EISCAT UHF radar colocated in Tromsø, we have examined whether or not the Q2DW was able to penetrate to the lower thermosphere for the period of 1–9 July 1999. It is found that the amplitude of the Q2DW with period of 51.2 hours maximized at 95 km height with values of ∼25 m s −1 in both meridional and zonal components. The Q2DW was attenuated above 95 km, but it appears to survive up to 108 km height in the meridional component. Between 85 and 95 km for the meridional component during this 8‐day interval, the Q2DW and semidiurnal tide were the strongest among the periodic components.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations45
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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