MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156291573 · doi:10.1029/2007ja012495

On the equatorward motion and fading of proton aurora during substorm growth phase

2007· article· en· W2156291573 on OpenAlexafffundabout
W. W. Liu, E. Donovan, Jun Liang, I. Voronkov, E. Spanswick, P. T. Jayachandran, B. J. Jackel, Mathieu Meurant

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Space Agency
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsSubstormBrightnessMagnetosphereProtonFadingFadePhysicsPolarPlasma sheetPhotometerGeophysicsMagnetic fieldAtmospheric sciencesAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using 50 high‐quality events from the Canadian Auroral Network for the OPEN Program Unified Study (CANOPUS) Gillam Meridian Scanning Photometer over 10 a (1989–1998), we show that proton aurora in the substorm growth phase exhibits a systematic tendency to fade. The average pattern of fading consists of a period of relatively stable proton aurora brightness and then a period of 15–20 min before onset during which the brightness decreases by an average of 15%. We interpret the observed proton aurora brightness variation in terms of the magnetic field stretching in the near‐Earth magnetosphere; in particular, the fading is interpreted as a result of the central plasma sheet magnetic field lines having stretched to such a degree that the loss cone closing effect dominates precipitation due to nonadiabatic proton motions.

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)0.001
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations18
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207