MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343390316 · doi:10.1093/pasj/psv068

Structure and sources of the sporadic meteor background from video observations

2015· article· en· W2343390316 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ivana Jakšová, V. Porubčan, J. Klačka

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications of the Astronomical Society of Japan · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVAgentúra na Podporu Výskumu a Vývoja
KeywordsMeteoroidMeteor (satellite)PhysicsPopulationMeteor showerAstronomyAsteroidOrbit (dynamics)Astrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate and discuss the structure of the sporadic meteor background population in the near-Earth space based on video meteor orbits from the SonotaCo database (SonotaCo 2009, WGN, 37, 55). The selection of the shower meteors was done by the Southworth–Hawkins streams-search criterion (Southworth & Hawkins 1963, Smithson. Contr. Astrophys., 7, 261). Of a total of 117786 orbits, 69.34% were assigned to sporadic background meteors. Our analysis revealed all the known sporadic sources, such as the dominant apex source which is splitting into the northern and southern branch. Part of a denser ring structure about the apex source connecting the antihelion and north toroidal sources is also evident. We showed that the annual activity of the apex source is similar to the annual variation in activity of the whole sporadic background. The antihelion source exhibits a very broad maximum from July until January and the north toroidal source shows three maxima similar to the radar observations by the Canadian Meteor Orbit Radar (CMOR). Potential parent bodies of the sporadic population were searched for by comparison of the distributions of the orbital elements of sporadic meteors, minor planets and comets.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublications of the Astronomical Society of JapanSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207