MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943806992 · doi:10.3390/galaxies7020053

Solar and Galactic Magnetic Halo Structure: Force-Free Dynamos?

2019· article· en· W2943806992 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGalaxies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamoPhysicsDynamo theoryMagnetic fieldMagnetic helicityMagnetic energyHaloMagnetohydrodynamicsClassical mechanicsAstrophysicsGalactic haloSolar dynamoGalaxyQuantum mechanicsMagnetization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetic fields may relax dissipatively to the minimum energy force-free condition whenever they are not constantly created or distorted. We review the axially symmetric solutions for force-free magnetic fields, especially for the non-linear field. A new formulation for the scale invariant state is given. Illustrative examples are shown. Applications to both stellar coronas and galactic halos are possible. Subsequently we study whether such force-free fields may be sustained by classical magnetic dynamo action. Although the answer is `not indefinitely’, there may be an evolutionary cycle wherein the magnetic field repeatedly relaxes to the minimum energy condition after a period of substantial growth and distortion. Different force-free dynamos may coexist at different locations. Helicity transfer between scales is studied briefly. A dynamo solution is given for the temporal evolution away from an initial linear force-free magnetic field due to both α 2 and ω terms. This can be used at the sub scale level to create a `delayed’ α effect.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.179 · 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