Auroral poleward boundary intensifications and tail bursty flows: A manifestation of a large‐scale ULF oscillation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auroral zone observations often show significant ULF power. We have analyzed auroral and plasma sheet observations during two prolonged periods of strongly southward and relatively steady interplanetary magnetic field (IMF). We find evidence that auroral poleward boundary intensifications (PBIs), which have large intensity and occur repetitively throughout such periods, may be a manifestation of a large‐scale ULF oscillation mode that strongly perturbs the plasma sheet and the auroral ionosphere. If this is correct, then ULF modes would be a major component of tail dynamics, of magnetosphere coupling to the ionosphere, and of auroral zone disturbances during periods of enhanced convection. They would simultaneously affect a large region of the nightside, extending along auroral zone field lines from the ionosphere to the equatorial plasma sheet and extending from field lines that lie near the magnetic separatrix to, at times, as close to the Earth as synchronous orbit. They would also occasionally have amplitudes as large as the changes that occur in association with other auroral zone disturbances such as substorms. Here we have found peak‐to‐peak amplitudes as high as several hundred nanoteslas in ground X, an order of magnitude in synchronous energetic proton fluxes, ∼20–40 nT in synchronous magnetic field components, ∼20 nT in tail magnetic field components, ∼1000 km/s in tail flow speeds, and ∼400 m/s in ionospheric flow speed. We find evidence for significant power at 0.5–0.7 mHz (∼25–30 min period), significant power at a possible second harmonic (∼1.1–1.3 mHz), and power at frequencies that could be higher harmonics simultaneously within the auroral ionosphere and within the nightside plasma sheet.
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".