MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885119326 · doi:10.1186/s40623-018-0899-0

Proton auroras during the transitional stage of substorm onset

2018· article· en· W2885119326 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Liang, E. Donovan, D. M. Gillies, E. Spanswick, Martin Connors

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Planets and Space · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsAthabasca UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstormProtonGeophysicsElectronIonospherePhysicsPrecipitationElectron precipitationLuminosityArc (geometry)AstrophysicsGeologyPlasmaMagnetosphereMeteorologyNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical auroral measurements repeatedly reveal the existence of a transitional stage between a quiescent preexisting arc and its significant auroral expansion in a substorm onset. Such a transitional stage of substorm onset (TSSO) is characterized by a gradual intensification and the emergence of auroral beads, along the preexisting arc. However, existing studies on TSSO are limited to electron auroras which are dominant in optical luminosity. In this study, we collect 12 substorm events to investigate the proton auroral features during the late growth phase and the TSSO. Our major results include: (1) we confirm the previous notion that the onset electron auroral arc is usually located at the poleward “shoulder” of the main proton auroral band. (2) While the electron auroral arc typically intensifies by a few times or even an order of magnitude during the TSSO, the concurrent proton aurora at the same location as the electron auroral arc shows much less noticeable variations. The proton auroral variations averaged over the arc band, as well as that integrated over the entire latitudinal range, are mostly within 10% of their mean late-growth-phase levels during the TSSO. Substantial intensifications of proton auroras occur after the poleward expansion of electron auroras. Even considering the spatial spreading of proton auroras, we estimate that the variation of ion precipitation fluxes on top of the ionosphere would be typically < 30% during the TSSO. The above observations impose implications and quantitative constraints on the possible mechanisms of TSSO and substorm onset. We assert that there is no significant ion energization or large-scale magnetic field reconfiguration during the TSSO. Instead, it is likely that the underlying mechanism of the TSSO might be certain kind of ky-dominated instability wave mode. The instability wavelength is comparable to the ion gyroradius, so that the ions are demagnetized, suppressing ion flux variations with the instability. Enhancing upward electric fields in the auroral acceleration region during the TSSO may also play a partial role in weakening the ion precipitation flux variation.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Planets and SpaceSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207