MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901164369 · doi:10.1029/2018gl079798

The 16‐Day Planetary Wave Triggers the SW1‐Tidal‐Like Signatures During 2009 Sudden Stratospheric Warming

2018· article· en· W2901164369 on OpenAlexaff
Maosheng He, Jorge L. Chau, Chris Hall, Masaki Tsutsumi, C. E. Meek, Peter Hoffmann

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSudden stratospheric warmingAtmospheric sciencesOscillation (cell signaling)Atmospheric tideThermosphereClimatologyPhysicsStratosphereGeologyIonosphereGeophysicsPolar vortexChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Enhanced nonmigrating tides SW1 (SWx represents semidiurnal westward mode with zonal wave number x) and SW3 during sudden stratospheric warming (SSW) were traditionally attributed to nonlinear interactions of quasi‐stationary planetary waves with the migrating tide SW2. Recent studies specified hypothetically that responsible for the interactions is the 16‐day wave, instead of the broadly accepted quasi‐stationary planetary waves. It is suspected that the 16‐day‐wave‐triggered secondary waves, at periods ∼12.4 and ∼11.6 hr, were detected at low‐frequency resolutions and misinterpreted as SW1 and SW3, respectively. While He et al. (2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/2018JD028400 ) associated the 11.6‐hr oscillation conclusively to the SW3‐like signature during SSW 2013 by diagnosing its wave number, the SW1‐like 12.4hr wave, however, has never been explicitly resolved, given its proximity to the period of an active lunar tide. Here, using the coherency in the mesospheric wind between two longitudinal sectors during SSW 2009, we identify a 12.4‐hr oscillation dominated by wave number 1 and therefore associate it to the SW1‐like signature.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207