MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783646079 · doi:10.1002/2017rs006453

Enhanced Polar Outflow Probe Ionospheric Radio Occultation Measurements at High Latitudes: Receiver Bias Estimation and Comparison With Ground‐Based Observations

2018· article· en· W2783646079 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadio Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsTECIonosondeIonosphereTotal electron contentOccultationGlobal Positioning SystemGeodesyRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceGeologyElectron densityPhysicsGeophysicsAstrophysicsComputer scienceTelecommunicationsElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents validation of ionospheric Global Positioning System (GPS) radio occultation measurements of the GPS Attitude, Positioning, and Profiling Experiment occultation receiver (GAP‐O). GAP is one of eight instruments comprising the Enhanced Polar Outflow Probe (e‐POP) instrument suite on board the Cascade Smallsat and Ionospheric Polar Explorer (CASSIOPE) satellite. One of the main error sources for certain GAP‐O data products is the receiver differential code bias (rDCB). A minimization of standard deviations (MSD) technique has shown the most promise for rDCB estimation, with estimates ranging primarily from −40 to −28 total electron content units (TECU = 10 16 el m −2 ; 21.6 to 15.1 ns), including a long‐term decrease in rDCB magnitude and variability over the first 3 years of instrument operation. In application of the MSD method, the sensitivity of bias estimates to ionospheric shell height are as large as 4.5 TECU per 100 km. MSD calculations also agree well with the “assumption of zero topside TEC” method for rDCB estimate at satellite apogee. Bias‐corrected topside TEC of GAP‐O was validated by statistical comparison with topside TEC obtained from ground‐based GPS TEC and ionosonde measurements. Although GAP‐O and ground‐based topside TEC had similar variability, GAP‐O consistently underestimated the ground‐derived topside TEC by up to 7 TECU. Ionospheric electron density profiles obtained from Abel inversion of GAP‐O occultation TEC showed good agreement with F region densities of ground‐based incoherent scatter radar measurements. Comparison of GAP‐O and ionosonde measurements revealed correlation coefficients of 0.78 and 0.79, for peak F region density and altitude, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.226 · 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