MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076612661 · doi:10.1134/s0016793206030091

The ionosphere of Europe and North America before the magnetic storm of October 28, 2003

2006· article· en· W2076612661 on OpenAlexaff
D. V. Blagoveshchensky, J. W. MacDugall, A. V. Pyatkova

Bibliographic record

VenueGeomagnetism and Aeronomy · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomagnetic stormIonosphereStormSubstormMiddle latitudesAtmospheric sciencesFlareLatitudeSolar flareCritical frequencyEnvironmental scienceClimatologyEarth's magnetic fieldGeologyMeteorologyPhysicsGeophysicsAstrophysicsMagnetosphereGeodesyMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The X17 solar flare occurred on October 28, 2003, and was followed by the X10 flare on October 29. These flares caused very strong geomagnetic storms (Halloween storms). The aim of the present study is to compare the variations in two main ionospheric parameters ( foF 2 and hmF 2) at two chains of ionosondes located in Europe and North America for the period October 23–28, 2003. This interval began immediately before the storm of October 28 and includes its commencement. Another task of the work is to detect ionospheric precursors of the storm or substorm expansion phase. An analysis is based on SPIDR data. The main results are as follows. The positive peak of δ foF 2 (where δ is the difference between disturbed and quiet values) is observed several hours before the magnetic storm or substorm commencement. This peak can serve as a disturbance precursor. The amplitude of δ foF 2 values varies from 20 to 100% of the foF 2 values. The elements of similarity in the variations in the δ foF 2 values at two chains are as follows: (a) the above δ foF 2 peak is as a rule observed simultaneously at two chains before the disturbance; (b) the δ foF 2 variations are similar at all midlatitude (or, correspondingly, high-latitude) ionosondes of the chain. The differences in the δ foF 2 values are as follows: (a) the effect of the main phase and the phase of strong storm recovery at one chain differs from such an effect at another chain; (b) the manifestation of disturbances at high-latitude stations of the chain differ from the manifestations at midlatitude stations. The δ hmF 2 variations are approximately opposite to the δ foF 2 variations, and the δ hmF 2 values lie in the interval 15–25% of the hmF 2 values. The performed study is useful and significant in studying the problems of the space weather, especially in a short-term prediction of ionospheric disturbances caused by magnetospheric storms or substorms.

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeomagnetism and AeronomySame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207