THEMIS observations of substorms on 26 February 2008 initiated by magnetotail reconnection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On 26 February 2008, the THEMIS satellites observed two substorms that occurred at about 0405 and 0455 UT. Angelopoulos et al. (2008) made a comprehensive study of the second event. In this paper we display detailed features of the two substorms with emphasis on the first. In both substorms, a distinct auroral intensification occurred during the earliest stage of onset, about 1 to 2 min after midtail reconnection began. This initial intensification was weak and localized and thus had the signatures of a pseudobreakup. In both substorms, a second, major intensification occurred next in the substorm onset sequence, followed by rapid and extensive poleward expansion. This second intensification had the features of the major expansion onset and was nearly coincident with observations of earthward flows and magnetic dipolarization in the near‐Earth tail. During the growth phase of the two substorms, open magnetic flux accumulated in the polar cap; in the expansion/recovery phase the polar cap open flux was quickly reduced. These observations are in agreement with the assertion that tail reconnection initiates the initial pseudobreakup and the ensuing major expansion and releases and transports energy to eventually cause near‐Earth dipolarization and the expansion phase onset of these two substorms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".