MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937503929 · doi:10.1029/2019sw002175

Using a Numerical MHD Model to Improve Solar Wind Time Shifting

2019· article· en· W2937503929 on OpenAlexafffund
Taylor Cameron, B. J. Jackel

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace Weather · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMagnetohydrodynamicsMagnetohydrodynamic driveSolar windShock (circulatory)Bow shock (aerodynamics)MeteorologyPhysicsFront (military)Shock waveComputer simulationGeophysicsMechanicsGeologyPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present three solar wind shock events that all occurred at times when Advanced Composition Explorer was near L1 and WIND was in front of the bow shock. We use a 1.5‐D MHD (magnetohydrodynamic) numerical model and the well known MVAB‐0 time‐shifting algorithm to propagate these events from Advanced Composition Explorer to the location of WIND. The results of these two methods are compared to WIND observations. We find that the 1.5‐D numerical model reproduces some important features in the WIND data that are not reflected in the time‐shifted results. We believe that 1.5‐D numerical simulations could supplement traditional time‐shifting methods in some circumstances for time‐shifting solar wind data to the bow shock.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpace WeatherSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207