Extreme Value Analysis of Induced Geoelectric Field in South Africa
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 Extreme geomagnetic disturbances occur rarely but can have great impact on technological systems such as power supply networks. Long‐term planning for extreme events requires the estimation of event impact for occurrence periods greater than the length of observed data. With this in mind an analysis of extreme geomagnetic events observed in South Africa (middle geomagnetic latitude) is performed over four solar cycles (1974–2015). An algorithm to identify active periods with minimum S Y M ‐ H ≤−100 nT is demonstrated. The sum of induced electric field over the course of each event is used to characterize the severity of each active period. It is found that the severity index (accumulated electric field magnitude Σ E ) shares a highly linear relationship with accumulated S Y M ‐ H over each event. The index Σ E is lognormal distributed, with tail deviating greater than lognormal, confirming heavy‐tailed occurrence. A general Pareto distribution is fitted to the tail of the distribution and extrapolated to calculate the return levels of extreme events. Return levels of once in 100 and once in 200 year events are estimated to be 9.4 × 10 4 mV/km min and 1.09 × 10 5 mV/km min, respectively. The top three events, in ascending order of severity, are the March 1989 storm, the events of late October 2003, and the April 1994 event—a long interval of coronal‐hole driven disturbances, bookended by two intense geomagnetic storms.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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