Impact of electron thermal effects on Farley‐Buneman waves at arbitrary aspect angles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a standard 8‐moment expansion of the fluid equations, we have extended fluid calculations of the effect of electron temperature feedback on the linear Farley‐Buneman instability theory to include the contribution of field‐aligned heat flow and field‐aligned wave electric fields through nonzero‐aspect angles. Our treatment includes arbitrary ion magnetization and neutral winds but is limited, for simplicity, to zero flow angles. Our results indicate that, for 3‐m waves, electron thermal corrections are significant (threshold phase velocities greater than predicted by isothermal theory by 20% or more) at aspect angles less than 0.35° for altitudes less than 103 km. Similar but smaller numbers are obtained for 10‐m waves. The impact of the thermal corrections normally also decreases rapidly with increasing altitude. These results provide a straightforward explanation for equatorial observations of 3‐m phase velocities that are at least 30% greater than the isothermal ion‐acoustic speed below 105 km in the equatorial regions. The altitude dependence of the observed phase speeds also mimics very well the behavior seen in our calculations. The implication is that the aspect angles of the structures must be smaller than 0.3°. This is consistent with recent findings from radar interferometry.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".