MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780917047 · doi:10.1002/2017gl075765

Spreading Speed of Magnetopause Reconnection X‐Lines Using Ground‐Satellite Coordination

2017· article· en· W2780917047 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Zou, Brian M. Walsh, Y. Nishimura, V. Angelopoulos, J. M. Ruohoniemi, K. A. McWilliams, Н. Нишитани

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMagnetopauseGeophysicsPhysicsMagnetic reconnectionSpacecraftField lineField (mathematics)Current (fluid)Computational physicsMagnetic fieldMagnetosphereGeologyAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conceptual and numerical models predict that magnetic reconnection starts at a localized region and then spreads out of the reconnection plane. At the Earth's magnetopause this spreading would occur primarily in local time along the boundary. Different simulations have found the spreading to occur at different speeds such as the Alfvén speed and speed of the current carriers. We use conjugate Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms (THEMIS) spacecraft and Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN) radar measurements to observationally determine the X‐line spreading speed at the magnetopause. THEMIS probes the reconnection parameters locally, and SuperDARN tracks the reconnection development remotely. Spreading speeds under different magnetopause boundary conditions are obtained and compared with model predictions. We find that while spreading under weak guide field could be explained by either the current carriers or the Alfvén waves, spreading under strong guide field is consistent only with the current carriers.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207