MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142764230 · doi:10.5194/angeo-22-1103-2004

Diurnal auroral occurrence statistics obtained via machine vision

2004· article· en· W2142764230 on OpenAlexafffund
M. T. Syrjäsuo, E. Donovan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales Geophysicae · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsComputer scienceSkyIonosphereSoftwareKey (lock)Remote sensingArtificial intelligenceGeophysicsMeteorologyGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Modern ground-based digital auroral All-Sky Imager (ASI) networks capture millions of images annually. Machine vision techniques are widely utilised in the retrieval of images from large data bases. Clearly, they can play an important scientific role in dealing with data from auroral ASI networks, facilitating both efficient searches and statistical studies. Furthermore, the development of automated techniques for identifying specific types of aurora opens up the potential of ASI control software that would change instrument operation in response to evolving geophysical conditions. In this paper, we describe machine vision techniques that we have developed for use on large auroral image data sets. We present the results of application of these techniques to a 350000 image subset of the CANOPUS Gillam ASI in the years 1993–1998. In particular, we obtain occurrence statistics for auroral arcs, patches, and Omega-bands. These results agree with those of previous manual auroral surveys.Key words. Ionosphere (Instruments and techniques) General (new fields)

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations78
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales GeophysicaeSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207