On the Origin of STEVE: Particle Precipitation or Ionospheric Skyglow?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract One of the recent developments in ionospheric research was the introduction of a subauroral spectacle called STEVE (Strong Thermal Emission Velocity Enhancement). Although STEVE has been documented by amateur night sky watchers for decades, it is an exciting new upper atmospheric phenomenon for the scientific community. Observed first by amateur auroral photographers, STEVE appeared as a narrow luminous structure across the night sky. Currently, only one scientific study has focused on STEVE, revealing that it corresponds to a narrow (tens of kilometers in north‐south extent) and long (thousands of kilometers in east‐west direction) structure located in the subauroral region. An important and fundamental question that arises from this study is the origin of STEVE; more specifically, does STEVE correspond to a new ionospheric phenomenon or is it due to particle precipitation? In this letter, we analyze a STEVE event on 28 March 2008 observed by Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms (THEMIS) ground‐based All‐Sky Imagers and a Polar Orbiting Environmental Satellite (POES). The POES‐17 satellite crossed STEVE at the center of the All‐Sky Imager field‐of‐view, allowing us to collect particle data simultaneously. These concurrent measurements show that STEVE might not be associated with particle precipitation (electrons or ions). Therefore, this event suggests that STEVE's skyglow (which we defined to be unrelated to aurora or airglow) could be generated in the ionosphere.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".