Whistler‐mode waves inside flux pileup region: Structured or unstructured?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract During reconnection, a flux pileup region (FPR) is formed behind a dipolarization front in an outflow jet. Inside the FPR, the magnetic field magnitude and Bz component increase and the whistler‐mode waves are observed frequently. As the FPR convects toward the Earth during substorms, it is obstructed by the dipolar geomagnetic field to form a near‐Earth FPR. Unlike the structureless emissions inside the tail FPR, we find that the whistler‐mode waves inside the near‐Earth FPR can exhibit a discrete structure similar to chorus. Both upper band and lower band chorus are observed, with the upper band having a larger propagation angle (and smaller wave amplitude) than the lower band. Most chorus elements we observed are “rising‐tone” type, but some are “falling‐tone” type. We notice that the rising‐tone chorus can evolve into falling‐tone chorus within <3 s. One of the factors that may explain why the waves are unstructured inside the tail FPR but become discrete inside the near‐Earth FPR is the spatial inhomogeneity of magnetic field: we find that such inhomogeneity is small inside the near‐Earth FPR but large inside the tail FPR.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".