Five-day planetary waves in the middle atmosphere from Odin satellite data and ground-based instruments in Northern Hemisphere summer 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. A number of studies have shown that 5-day planetary waves modulate noctilucent clouds and the closely related Polar Mesosphere Summer Echoes (PMSE) at the summer mesopause. Summer stratospheric winds should inhibit wave propagation through the stratosphere and, although some numerical models (Geisler and Dickinson, 1976) do show a possibility for upward wave propagation, it has also been suggested that the upward propagation may in practice be confined to the winter hemisphere with horizontal propagation of the wave from the winter to the summer hemisphere at mesosphere heights causing the effects observed at the summer mesopause. It has further been proposed (Garcia et al., 2005) that 5-day planetary waves observed in the summer mesosphere could be excited in-situ by baroclinic instability in the upper mesosphere. In this study, we first extract and analyze 5-day planetary wave characteristics on a global scale in the middle atmosphere (up to 54 km in temperature, and up to 68 km in ozone concentration) using measurements by the Odin satellite for selected days during northern hemisphere summer from 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2007. Second, we show that 5-day temperature fluctuations consistent with westward-traveling 5-day waves are present at the summer mesopause, using local ground-based meteor-radar observations. Finally we examine whether any of three possible sources of the detected temperature fluctuations at the summer mesopause can be excluded: upward propagation from the stratosphere in the summer-hemisphere, horizontal propagation from the winter-hemisphere or in-situ excitation as a result of the baroclinic instability. We find that in one case, far from solstice, the baroclinic instability is unlikely to be involved. In one further case, close to solstice, upward propagation in the same hemisphere seems to be ruled out. In all other cases, all or any of the three proposed mechanisms are consistent with the observations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".