MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921179382 · doi:10.1029/2018ja026067

How Well Can We Estimate Pedersen Conductance From the THEMIS White‐Light All‐Sky Cameras?

2019· article· en· W2921179382 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mai Mai Lam, M. P. Freeman, C. M. Jackman, I. J. Rae, N. M. E. Kalmoni, J. K. Sandhu, C. Forsyth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBritish Antarctic SurveyScience and Technology Facilities CouncilU.S. Geological SurveyNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationSight Research UKUC Berkeley College of ChemistryFlorida Institute of TechnologyNatural Environment Research CouncilAlberta Agricultural Research InstituteNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsZenithConductanceRadarIncoherent scatterBackscatter (email)SkyPhysicsRemote sensingSubstormEarth's magnetic fieldComputational physicsSatelliteEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeodesyOpticsGeologyMagnetic fieldScattering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We show that a white‐light all‐sky imager can estimate Pedersen conductance with an uncertainty of 3 mho or 40%. Using a series of case studies over a wide range of geomagnetic activity, we compare estimates of Pedersen conductance from the backscatter spectrum of the Poker Flat Incoherent Scatter Radar with auroral intensities. We limit this comparison to an area bounding the radar measurements and within a limited area close to (but off) imager zenith. We confirm a linear relationship between conductance and the square root of auroral intensity predicted from a simple theoretical approximation. Hence, we extend a previous empirical result found for green‐line emissions to the case of white‐light off‐zenith emissions. The difference between the radar conductance and the best‐fit relationship has a mean of −0.76 ± 4.8 mho and a relative mean difference of 21% ± 78%. The uncertainties are reduced to −0.72 ± 3.3 mho and 0% ± 40% by averaging conductance over 10 min, which we attribute to the time that auroral features take to move across the imager field being greater than the 1‐min resolution of the radar data. Our results demonstrate and calibrate the use of Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions during Substorms all‐sky imagers for estimating Pedersen conductance. This technique allows the extension of estimates of Pedersen conductance from Incoherent Scatter Radars to derive continental‐scale estimates on scales of ~1–10 min and ~100 km 2 . It thus complements estimates from low‐altitude satellites, satellite auroral imagers, and ground‐based magnetometers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207