MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089086569 · doi:10.1029/2007gl032226

Ultra‐relativistic acceleration of electrons in planetary magnetospheres

2007· article· en· W2089086569 on OpenAlexaff
Danny Summers, Yoshiharu Omura

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsElectronMagnetosphereVan Allen radiation beltWhistlerAtomic physicsPitch angleParticle accelerationComputational physicsAccelerationElectromagnetic radiationPlasmaAstrophysicsNuclear physicsGeophysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new particle acceleration mechanism called ultra‐relativistic acceleration (URA). URA comprises electron energization due to a special form of nonlinear phase trapping by a coherent whistler‐mode wave for electrons with an initial Lorentz factor γ 0 satisfying γ 0 > Ω EQ / ω ; ω is the wave frequency and Ω EQ is the electron cyclotron frequency at the equator of an assumed dipole magnetic field. Radiation belt electrons that encounter a combination of relativistic turning acceleration (RTA) followed by multiple URA interactions can undergo significant energy increase. Under ideal conditions, at Earth ( L = 4) several‐hundred‐keV electrons can be energized to several MeV within a few seconds, while at Jupiter ( L = 8), several‐hundred‐keV electrons can be energized by tens of MeV in a few tens of seconds. URA can play a prominent role in generating the several‐MeV electrons observed in Earth's outer zone and the tens‐of‐MeV electrons observed in Jupiter's magnetosphere. More generally, we expect URA to be an effective electron energization mechanism in cosmic plasma environments that contain a magnetic mirror geometry and electromagnetic whistler‐mode emissions.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.681

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations116
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207