Geomagnetic storm effects at F1-layer heights from incoherent scatter observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Storm effects at F1-layer heights (160–200 km) were analyzed for the first time using Millstone Hill (mid-latitudes) and EISCAT (auroral zone) incoherent scatter (IS) observations. The morphological study has shown both increases (positive effect) and decreases (negative effect) in electron concentration. Negative storm effects prevail for all seasons and show a larger magnitude than positive ones, the magnitude of the effect normally increasing with height. At Millstone Hill the summer storm effects are small compared to other seasons, but they are well detectable. At EISCAT this summer decrease takes place only with respect to the autumnal period and the autumn/spring asymmetry in the storm effects is well pronounced. Direct and significant correlation exists between deviations in electron concentration at the F1-layer heights and in the F2-layer maximum. Unlike the F2-layer the F1-region demonstrates a relatively small reaction to geomagnetic disturbances despite large perturbations in thermospheric parameters. Aeronomic parameters extracted from IS observations are used to explain the revealed morphology. A competition between atomic and molecular ion contributions to Ne variations was found to be the main physical mechanism controlling the F1-layer storm effect. The revealed morphology is shown to be related with neutral composition (O, O2, N2) seasonal and storm-time variations. The present day understanding of the F1-region formation mechanisms is sufficient to explain the observed storm effects.Key words. Atmospheric composition and structure (thermosphere-composition and chemistry); ionosphere (ion chemistry and composition; ionospheric disturbances)
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".