MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735204752 · doi:10.1002/2017ja024106

Data‐derived optimization of sensitivity requirements for upcoming auroral imaging missions

2017· article· en· W2735204752 on OpenAlexaff
E. Donovan, V. M. Uritsky, Craig Unick, V.N. Troyan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstormSpacecraftSensitivity (control systems)Temporal resolutionScale (ratio)ScalingPhysicsIntensity (physics)TurbulenceRemote sensingImage resolutionGeophysicsAerospace engineeringMeteorologyAstronomyGeologyOpticsPlasmaMagnetosphereMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using an extensive database of ultraviolet images of the nighttime sector of the northern auroral oval obtained from the POLAR spacecraft and data analysis tools adopted from statistical mechanics of turbulent flows, we identify scaling relations describing substorm time variability of the auroral intensity as a function of spatial scale and auroral intensity level. By extrapolating these relations to scales smaller than those resolved by previously flown auroral missions, we derive contrast and sensitivity constraints for a next‐generation global auroral imager. The outcomes of this analysis, combined with the results reported by Uritsky et al. (2010), make it possible to optimize sensitivity and resolution requirements for future auroral imaging missions intended to observe auroral structure and dynamics across wide ranges of spatial and temporal scales.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207