STARE velocities: 2. Evening westward electron flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Four evening events and one morning event of joint EISCAT/STARE observations during ~22h are considered and the differences between observed STARE line-of-sight (l-o-s) velocities and EISCAT electron drift velocities projected onto the STARE beams are studied. We demonstrate that the double-pulse technique, which is currently in use in the STARE routine data handling, typically underestimates the true phase velocity as inferred from the multi-pulse STARE data. We show that the STARE velocities are persistently smaller (1.5–2 times) than the EISCAT velocities, even for the multi-pulse data. The effect seems to be more pronounced in the evening sector when the Finland radar observes at large flow angles. We evaluate the performance of the ion-acoustic approach (IAA, Nielsen and Schlegel, 1985) and the off-orthogonal fluid approach (OOFA, Uspensky et al., 2003) techniques to predict the true electron drift velocity for the base event of 12 February 1999. The IAA technique predicts the convection reasonably well for enhanced flows of >~1000m/s, but not so well for slower ones. By considering the EISCAT N(h) profiles, we derive the effective aspect angle and effective altitude of backscatter, and use this information for application of the OOFA technique. We demonstrate that the OOFA predictions for the base event are superior over the IAA predictions and thus, we confirm that OOFA predicts the electron velocities reasonably well in the evening sector, in addition to the morning sector, as concluded by Uspensky et al. (2003). To check how "robust" the OOFA model is and how successful it is for convection estimates without the EISCAT support, we analysed three additional evening events and one additional morning event for which information on N(h) profiles was intentionally ignored. By accepting the mean STARE/EISCAT velocity ratio of 0.55 and the mean azimuth rotation of 9° (derived for the basic event), we show that the OOFA performs reasonably well for these additional events. Key words. Ionosphere (ionospheric irregularities, plasma waves and instabilities, auroral ionosphere)
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".