Geomagnetically induced currents: Science, engineering, and applications readiness
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper is the primary deliverable of the very first NASA Living With a Star Institute Working Group, Geomagnetically Induced Currents (GIC) Working Group. The paper provides a broad overview of the current status and future challenges pertaining to the science, engineering, and applications of the GIC problem. Science is understood here as the basic space and Earth sciences research that allows improved understanding and physics‐based modeling of the physical processes behind GIC. Engineering, in turn, is understood here as the “impact” aspect of GIC. Applications are understood as the models, tools, and activities that can provide actionable information to entities such as power systems operators for mitigating the effects of GIC and government agencies for managing any potential consequences from GIC impact to critical infrastructure. Applications can be considered the ultimate goal of our GIC work. In assessing the status of the field, we quantify the readiness of various applications in the mitigation context. We use the Applications Readiness Level (ARL) concept to carry out the quantification.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it