Magnetospheric Source Region of Auroral Finger‐like Structures Observed by the RBSP‐A Satellite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Auroral finger‐like structures appear equatorward of the auroral oval in the diffuse auroral region and contribute to the auroral fragmentation into patches. A previous report of the first conjugate observation of auroral finger‐like structures using a Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms (THEMIS) Ground‐Based Observatories camera and the THEMIS‐E satellite at a radial distance of ∼8 R E showed antiphase oscillations of magnetic and plasma pressures in the dawnside plasma sheet. In the present study, we report another simultaneous observation of auroral finger‐like structures at Gillam, Canada, at ∼0900 UT (0230 magnetic local time) on 14 November 2014 with the Radiation Belt Storm Probes satellites at 5.8 R E in the inner magnetosphere. From this simultaneous observation event, we obtained the following observations. (1) Auroral finger‐like structures developed poleward in the equatorward moving auroral arc at the equatorward edge of the auroral oval. (2) Both the electron and ion OMNI fluxes measured by HOPE increased at ∼0900 UT as the satellite footprint entered the auroral region, indicating that the satellite was crossing the observed auroral finger‐like structures. (3) The absolute value of magnetic pressure was several times that of the plasma pressure, and no systematic phase relationship was identified between the magnetic and plasma pressures, unlike that in the THEMIS case. Based on these observations, we discuss two possible causes of the observed finger‐like structures, namely, pressure‐driven instability in the magnetosphere and gradient drift instability in the ionosphere. In this paper, the latter possibility is newly suggested to develop in the equatorward moving aurora associated with the westward electric field in the equatorward ionospheric density gradient.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".