Multi-station basis for Polar Cap (PC) indices: ensuring credibility and operational reliability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Polar Cap (PC) indices, PCN (North) and PCS (South) are based on polar geomagnetic observations from Qaanaaq (Thule) and Vostok, respectively, processed to measure the transpolar plasma convection that may seriously affect space weather conditions. To establish reliable space weather forecasts based on PC indices, and also to ensure credibility of their use for scientific analyses of solar wind-magnetosphere interactions, additional sources of data for the PC indices are investigated. In the search for alternative index sources, objective quality criteria are established here to be used for the selection among potential candidates. These criteria are applied to existing PC index series to establish a quality scale. In the Canadian region, the data from Resolute Bay magnetometer are shown to provide alternative PCN indices of adequate quality. In Antarctica, the data from Concordia Dome-C observatory are shown to provide basis for alternative PCS indices. In examples to document the usefulness of these alternative index sources it is shown that PCN indices in a real-time version based on magnetometer data from Resolute Bay could have given 6 h of early warning, of which the last 2 h were “red alert”, up to the onset of the strong substorm event on 13 March 1989 that caused power outage in Quebec. The alternative PCS indices based on data from Dome-C have helped to disclose that presently available Vostok-based PCS index values are corrupted throughout most of 2011.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".