MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078907584 · doi:10.1029/2002eo000276

Recent acceleration of the north magnetic pole linked to magnetic jerks

2002· article· en· W2078907584 on OpenAlexafffund
L R Newitt, Mioara Mandéa, L McKee, Jean‐Jacques Orgeval

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsOutreachEarth's magnetic fieldMotion (physics)Magnetic fieldPosition (finance)Political scienceIdeal (ethics)GeodesyPhysicsGeographyClassical mechanicsLawBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surveys to determine the location of the North Magnetic Pole (NMP) have been conducted regularly since 1947 to serve two basic functions: to educate, and to provide valuable research. The public has always been fascinated and often misinformed about the nature and significance of the NMP. Thus, an NMP survey offers an ideal opportunity for public outreach and education. Scientifically, NMP surveys test the veracity of global magnetic field models such as the International Geomagnetic Reference Field. The act of determining the NMP's position also reveals facts about its motion that might otherwise be overlooked when using global models. The most recent survey of the NMR completed in May 2001, showed an unprecedented increase in the pole's rate of motion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations62
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207