MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2129705878 · doi:10.1139/p2012-010

Vibrational populations of near-ultraviolet O<sub>2</sub> band systems in the night airglow <sup>1</sup>This article is part of a Special issue that honours the work of Dr. Donald M. Hunten FRSC who passed away in December 2010 after a very illustrious career.

2012· article· en· W2129705878 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
R. L. Gattinger, I. C. McDade, A. L. Broadfoot, W. F. J. Evans, J. Stegman, E. J. Llewellyn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsAirglowPhysicsSpectrographSpectral lineAtomic physicsSpectrum (functional analysis)MesosphereExcited stateSpectral bandsAstrophysicsAtmospheric sciencesOpticsAstronomyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observations of the limb night airglow spectrum from 250 to 475 nm, emitted from the upper mesosphere and lower thermosphere, are compared with model spectra. Data from the Arizona GLO-1 imaging spectrograph and the OSIRIS spectrograph are combined to form the observed mean airglow spectrum; a tabulated version of this spectrum is included. Model spectra of the individual O2 Herzberg I, II, and III, Chamberlain, and Slanger band systems are combined to simulate the observed mean spectrum. Franck–Condon relative band intensities are used to form a series of basis functions for the upper vibrational levels in each band system. These functions are fitted to the observed airglow spectrum with a least-squares method, the relative vibrational populations are derived and discussed.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate→French-language works237,207→