Reliable real-time Polar Cap (PC) indices for space weather monitoring and forecasts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Polar Cap (PC) indices were approved by the International Association for Geomagnetism and Aeromony (IAGA) by Resolution No. 3 (2013) noting that “ IAGA … recommends use of the PC index by the international scientific community in its near-real time and definitive forms” . PC indices were made available in 2014 at the web portal http://pcindex.org holding near-real time as well as final index values. The near-real time PC index values are not permanently available. However, analyses of indices on basis of occasional downloads have detected differences between near-real time and final PC indices of up to 3.65 mV/m (Stauning, 2018b, Ann Geophys , 36 , 621–631). At such differences, one or the other index may indicate (or hide) strong geomagnetic activity without justification in the actual conditions. The present work has disclosed the cause of observed large differences between real-time and final PC index values in the IAGA-endorsed versions. In addition, anticipated differences are derived on a general basis from the available basic magnetic data by using the index calculation procedures and calibration constants provided by the PC index suppliers. It is shown that corresponding or even larger anomalies are expected to be common during moderate to strong magnetic activity where the near-real time PC indices might otherwise prove very useful for space weather monitoring, e.g., for power grid protection. An alternative real-time PC index derivation scheme described here reduces the excessive differences between real-time and final PC index values by an order of magnitude.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".