MESSENGER observations of a flux‐transfer‐event shower at Mercury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis of MESSENGER magnetic field observations taken in the southern lobe of Mercury's magnetotail and the adjacent magnetosheath on 11 April 2011 indicates that a total of 163 flux transfer events (FTEs) occurred within a 25 min interval. Each FTE had a duration of ∼2–3 s and was separated in time from the next by ∼8–10 s. A range of values have been reported at Earth, with mean values near ∼1–2 min and ∼8 min, respectively. We term these intervals of quasiperiodic flux transfer events “FTE showers.” The northward and sunward orientation of the interplanetary magnetic field during this shower strongly suggests that the FTEs observed during this event formed just tailward of Mercury's southern magnetic cusp. The point of origin for the shower was confirmed with the Cooling model of FTE motion. Modeling of the individual FTE‐type flux ropes in the magnetosheath indicates that these flux ropes had elliptical cross sections, a mean semimajor axis of 0.15 R M (where R M is Mercury's radius, or 2440 km), and a mean axial magnetic flux of 1.25 MWb. The lobe magnetic field was relatively constant until the onset of the FTE shower, but thereafter the field magnitude decreased steadily until the spacecraft crossed the magnetopause. This decrease in magnetic field intensity is frequently observed during FTE showers. Such a decrease may be due to the diamagnetism of the new magnetosheath plasma being injected into the tail by the FTEs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".