MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100183713 · doi:10.1002/2014gl061927

Observational evidence of electron pitch angle scattering driven by ECH waves

2014· article· en· W2100183713 on OpenAlexaff
Satoshi Kurita, Yoshizumi Miyoshi, C. M. Cully, V. Angelopoulos, O. Le Contel, Mitsuru Hikishima, Hiroaki Misawa

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsScatteringPitch angleWhistlerComputational physicsElectronDiffusionAtomic physicsOpticsGeophysicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using the plasma wave and electron data obtained from Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms, we show a signature of electron pitch angle scattering driven by Electrostatic Cyclotron Harmonic (ECH) waves in the velocity distribution function (VDF). The diffusion curve of whistler mode waves is used as a proxy to identify changes in VDFs due to wave‐particle interactions. We confirm that the shape of the VDF well agrees with the diffusion curve of whistler mode waves when whistler mode chorus alone is active. On the other hand, we find that the shape of the VDF deviates from the diffusion curves at low pitch angles when ECH waves are active following the inactivation of chorus waves. The result is observational support for electron pitch angle scattering caused by ECH waves and suggests that ECH waves can contribute to generation of diffuse auroras.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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