MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462963816 · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/2/133

A COUPLED 2 × 2D BABCOCK–LEIGHTON SOLAR DYNAMO MODEL. II. REFERENCE DYNAMO SOLUTIONS

2017· article· en· W2462963816 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCollège de Bois-de-Boulogne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamoSolar dynamoAmplitudeRotational symmetrySolar cycleMagnetic fluxDipoleMagnetic fieldMeridional flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In this paper we complete the presentation of a new hybrid 2 × 2D flux transport dynamo (FTD) model of the solar cycle based on the Babcock–Leighton mechanism of poloidal magnetic field regeneration via the surface decay of bipolar magnetic regions (BMRs). This hybrid model is constructed by allowing the surface flux transport (SFT) simulation described in Lemerle et al. to provide the poloidal source term to an axisymmetric FTD simulation defined in a meridional plane, which in turn generates the BMRs required by the SFT. A key aspect of this coupling is the definition of an emergence function describing the probability of BMR emergence as a function of the spatial distribution of the internal axisymmetric magnetic field. We use a genetic algorithm to calibrate this function, together with other model parameters, against observed cycle 21 emergence data. We present a reference dynamo solution reproducing many solar cycle characteristics, including good hemispheric coupling, phase relationship between the surface dipole and the BMR-generating internal field, and correlation between dipole strength at cycle maximum and peak amplitude of the next cycle. The saturation of the cycle amplitude takes place through the quenching of the BMR tilt as a function of the internal field. The observed statistical scatter about the mean BMR tilt, built into the model, acts as a source of stochasticity which dominates amplitude fluctuations. The model thus can produce Dalton-like epochs of strongly suppressed cycle amplitude lasting a few cycles and can even shut off entirely following an unfavorable sequence of emergence events.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations63
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical JournalSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207