MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2148353028 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0461

Response of ionospheric disturbance dynamo and electromagnetic induction during geomagnetic storm

2015· article· en· W2148353028 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E.O. Falayi, A. B. Rabiu, O.S. Bolaji, Rufus Sola Fayose

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsIonospheric dynamo regionEarth's magnetic fieldGeomagnetic stormDynamoSolar windIonosphereAtmospheric sciencesGeophysicsInterplanetary magnetic fieldMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During geomagnetic storms, the direct penetration of magnetospheric convection electric field and the ionospheric disturbance dynamo (IDD) take place in the ionosphere. In this paper, we studied variability of IDD and electromagnetic induction (EMI) at different latitudinal sectors during the geomagnetic storms on 7 and 8 September 2002 and 20 and 21 November 2003 with high solar wind speed due to coronal mass ejection. This investigation employs geomagnetic field components (H and Z), the geomagnetic indices (Dst, AL, and AU), solar wind speed (Vx), and interplanetary magnetic field (Bz). It was observed that the H component of geomagnetic field decreases across latitudes, and varies with Vx, Bz, Dst, AL, and AU indices throughout the difference phases of the storm. Our result demonstrated the dominance of the IDD during the nighttime compared to the daytime. This implies that neutral dynamic wind is greater at night than during the day. Higher ratio ΔZ/ΔH is observed at nighttime because of the reduction on the E region conductivity, which allowed F region electric fields to dominate.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physics→Same topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics→French-language works237,207→