On the Close Correspondence Between Storm Time ULF Wave Power and the POES VLF Chorus Wave Amplitude Proxy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ground‐based Pc5 ultralow frequency (ULF) wave power in multiple ground‐based meridians is compared to the very low frequency (VLF) wave amplitude proxy, derived from Polar Operational Environmental Satellite (POES) precipitation, for the 33 storms studied by Li et al. (2015, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL065342 ). The results reveal common L‐shell and time profiles for the ULF waves and VLF proxy for every single storm, especially at L ≤ 6, and identical discrimination between efficient and inefficient radiation belt electron acceleration. The observations imply either ULF waves play a role in driving precipitation, which is falsely interpreted as VLF wave power in the proxy, ULF waves drive VLF waves (the reverse being energetically unfeasible), or both have a common driver with nearly identical L‐shell and time dependence. Global ground‐based ULF wave power coherence implies that a small number of meridians can be used to estimate storm time radial diffusion coefficients. However, the strong correspondence between ULF wave power and VLF wave proxy complicates causative assessments of electron acceleration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".