MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2436836093 · doi:10.1002/2016ja022550

Near‐Earth heliospheric magnetic field intensity since 1750: 2. Cosmogenic radionuclide reconstructions

2016· article· en· W2436836093 on OpenAlexaff
M. J. Owens, E. W. Cliver, K. G. McCracken, J. Beer, Luke Barnard, M. Lockwood, A. P. Rouillard, Dário Passos, Pete Riley, Ilya Usoskin, Y.‐M. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchLeverhulme TrustScience and Technology Facilities CouncilSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCosmogenic nuclideSunspotEarth's magnetic fieldPhysicsCosmic rayMagnetic fieldAstrophysicsSolar flareHeliosphereSolar windGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This is Part 2 of a study of the near‐Earth heliospheric magnetic field strength, B, since 1750. Part 1 produced composite estimates of B from geomagnetic and sunspot data over the period 1750–2013. Sunspot‐based reconstructions can be extended back to 1610, but the paleocosmic ray (PCR) record is the only data set capable of providing a record of solar activity on millennial timescales. The process for converting 10Be concentrations measured in ice cores to B is more complex than with geomagnetic and sunspot data, and the uncertainties in B derived from cosmogenic nuclides (~20% for any individual year) are much larger. Within this level of uncertainty, we find reasonable overall agreement between PCR‐based B and the geomagnetic‐ and sunspot number‐based series. This agreement was enhanced by excising low values in PCR‐based B attributed to high‐energy solar proton events. Other discordant intervals, with as yet unspecified causes remain included in our analysis. Comparison of 3 year averages centered on sunspot minimum yields reasonable agreement between the three estimates, providing a means to investigate the long‐term changes in the heliospheric magnetic field into the past even without a means to remove solar proton events from the records.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207