MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614359546 · doi:10.22606/gr.2017.22002

Truncation of the Earth Impulse Responses Relating Geoelectric Fields and Geomagnetic Field Variations

2017· article· en· W2614359546 on OpenAlexaff
Risto Pirjola, D. H. Boteler

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosciences Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEarthquake Detection and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarth's magnetic fieldGeomagnetic stormImpulse (physics)GeophysicsImpulse responseGeomagnetically induced currentMathematical analysisGeologyGeodesyMathematicsMagnetic fieldPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To assess the geomagnetic hazard to power systems, it is necessary to model the Geomagnetically Induced Currents (GIC) produced during space weather storms.This requires knowledge of the geoelectric fields that drive GIC.In the time domain, the geoelectric fields can be calculated using a convolution integral including the geomagnetic field or its time derivative and an impulse response function for the Earth.In principle, the integral extends to infinity but for practical calculations the impulse responses must be truncated at a finite length.In this paper, we investigate the effects of the truncation on the calculation of the geoelectric fields.We consider how long the impulse responses need to be to obtain sufficiently accurate geoelectric field values.It is found that the high-pass impulse response used with geomagnetic data can be truncated very early, e.g. at 1 h, while the low-pass impulse response used with geomagnetic time derivative data must be extended much longer, e.g. until 24 h.

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)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeosciences ResearchSame topicEarthquake Detection and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207