Statistical comparison of WINDII auroral green line emission rate with DMSP/SSJ4 electron energy input for high and low solar flux years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The atmospheric response to precipitating auroral electrons under varying conditions of solar illumination is investigated using a statistical approach with respect to magnetic local time (MLT), solar zenith angle (χ), and geomagnetic latitude (MLAT) in the northern high‐latitude region. Vertical profiles of daytime auroral O(1S) emission rate are obtained from UARS/WINDII measurements by removing the airglow components. These are compared with precipitating electron and proton input observed with DMSP‐F10 and ‐F12 SSJ4 from which total energy and average energy are obtained. In order to investigate the solar flux effect, 2 a of data are examined, 1993 (high solar flux) and 1996 (low solar flux). Total electron energy flux increases with increasing solar zenith angle from 40° to 160° so that the energy flux during nighttime is much greater than in the daytime. During the daytime (χ ≤ 90°) the auroral atmospheric response correlates well with electron energy input yielding auroral production rates of 1.2 and 1.6 kR erg−1 cm2 s, but this relation breaks down beyond χ = 90°. It is suspected that nighttime thin sheet auroral profiles are not correctly inverted for this limb‐viewing imager. A strong anticorrelation is found between the altitude of peak auroral volume emission rate and the average precipitating electron energy with slopes of 12.1 km keV−1 and 5.7 km keV−1 for 1993 and 1996, respectively. The dependence of auroral emission rate on solar illumination conditions is consistent with earlier work by Newell et al. (1996b) and others, but the clear dependence on solar zenith angle has not been demonstrated before.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".