MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087299042 · doi:10.5194/angeo-20-1073-2002

Case studies of space weather events from their launching on the Sun to their impacts on power systems on the Earth

2002· article· en· W2087299042 on OpenAlexaffabout
H -L Lam, D. H. Boteler, L. Trichtchenko

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales Geophysicae · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationUniversity of BirminghamU.S. Naval Research LaboratoryNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanUniversity of TokyoCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsInterplanetary spaceflightSpace weatherInterplanetary spaceCoronal mass ejectionPhysicsGeomagnetically induced currentInterplanetary magnetic fieldEarth's magnetic fieldGeomagnetic stormAstronomySolar flareInterplanetary mediumSpace physicsSolar windGeophysicsPlasmaMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Active geomagnetic conditions on 12–13, 15–16, and 22–23 September 1999 resulted in geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) measurable in power systems in Canada and the United States. Different solar origins for these three events gave rise to dissimilar interplanetary signatures. We used these events to present three case studies, each tracing an entire space weather episode from its inception on the Sun, propagation through the interplanetary medium, manifestation on the ground as intense magnetic and electric fluctuations, and its eventual impact on technological systems.Key words. Geomagnetism and paleomagnetism (rapid time variations) – Interplanetary physics (interplanetary magnetic fields) – Solar physics, astrophysics, and astronomy (flares and mass ejections)

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.247
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations26
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales GeophysicaeSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207