MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939309631 · doi:10.1029/2018rs006748

A Bottomside Parameterization for the Empirical Canadian High Arctic Ionospheric Model

2019· article· en· W2939309631 on OpenAlexafffundabout
David R. Themens, P. T. Jayachandran, Anthony M. McCaffrey, Benjamin Reid, R. H. Varney

Bibliographic record

VenueRadio Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersDefence Research and Development CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTECIonosphereElectron densityIncoherent scatterClassification of discontinuitiesMiddle latitudesAtmospheric sciencesMathematicsPhysicsElectronGeophysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, we present a bottomside model representation to be used by the Empirical Canadian High Arctic Ionospheric Model (E‐CHAIM). This model features a new approach to modeling the bottomside electron density; namely, instead of modelling electron density directly, E‐CHAIM models the altitude profile of the scale thickness of a single bottomside layer. In this approach, the curvature in the bottomside associated with the E region and F1 layer is represented in the scale thickness domain as a peak function centered at the layer peak altitude. The use of this approach ensures the production of explicitly doubly differentiable bottomside electron density profiles and directly avoids issues known to exist within current standards, such as the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI), which has discontinuities in space, time, and in the vertical electron density gradient. In terms of performance, after removing the impacts of hmF2 and NmF2, the new E‐CHAIM profile function generally performs comparably to the IRI, with bottomside TEC from both models within 2.0 TECU (1 TECU = 1016 e/m3) of observations. More specifically, the E‐CHAIM bottomside is demonstrated to outperform the IRI bottomside function in the F region during low solar activity periods with respect to incoherent scatter radar observations. At high latitudes, E‐CHAIM tends to outperform the IRI during winter months by between 10% and 40% of NmF2 while being outperformed by the IRI by between 10% and 25% of NmF2 during summer periods, mainly during the daytime at high solar activity.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.253
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

Citations43
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadio ScienceSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207