Dynamic response of Earth's magnetosphere to <i>B</i><sub><i>y</i></sub> reversals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we use a three‐dimensional magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) model to study the response of the magnetosphere‐ionosphere system to a sudden change in the sign of the By component of the interplanetary magnetic field. We find that after such a change the magnetosphere responds as a linear system and the ionospheric potential can be very accurately represented by a linear superposition of the initial and final distributions of the ionospheric potential. Although heuristic in nature, this representation of ionospheric potentials significantly simplifies the analysis of the time‐dependent output of the model. The accuracy of this decomposition of the ionospheric potential is discussed. This decomposition also helps to define, in a very intuitively clear way, the bow shock to ionosphere communication time and the ionospheric reconfiguration time. We find that in our model simulation the reconfiguration time depends on the strength of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) and the solar wind speed but not on the ionospheric conductivities. The communication time in our model has a typical value of 300–400 s and the reconfiguration time is approximately 300–450 s. These characteristic times are generally consistent with observations and earlier modeling results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".