MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136408208 · doi:10.1109/pccga.2000.883852

Simulating the aurora borealis

2002· article· en· W2136408208 on OpenAlexafffund
Gladimir V. G. Baranoski, Jon Rokne, Peter Shirley, T. Trondsen, Rui Bastos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectronAtmosphere (unit)Natural phenomenonExcited statePhysicsBrightnessEnergy (signal processing)Representation (politics)Natural (archaeology)OpticsMeteorologyGeologyAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an algorithm to simulate the aurora borealis, commonly known as the "northern lights", a natural phenomenon of great visual beauty and considerable scientific interest. The algorithm is based on the current understanding of the physical origin of the aurora. This natural display is mainly caused by high-energy electrons originating in the Sun and entering the Earth's atmosphere in narrow regions centered on the magnetic poles. These electrons collide with atmospheric atoms which are excited to higher energy levels. The excited atoms emit rapidly varying visible light in a curtain-like volume as they return to lower energy levels thereby creating the aurora. By simulating these light emissions along with the spatial and temporal distribution of the entering electrons, we are able to render the major visual aspects of auroral displays. This approach also allows the representation of time-dependent features that characterize the dynamic nature of the aurorae. The applicability of this auroral model for artistic and research purposes is illustrated through comparisons of synthetic images with photographs of real auroral displays.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0470.003

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.209 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations14
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImpact of Light on Environment and HealthFrench-language works237,207