MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955685806 · doi:10.12737/stp-52201913

Diagnostics of auroral oval boundaries on the basis of the magnetogram inversion technique

2019· article· en· W2955685806 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Сергей Лунюшкин, Sergey Lunyushkin, Юрий Пенских, Yury Penskikh

Bibliographic record

VenueSolar-Terrestrial Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversità degli Studi dell'AquilaRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchU.S. Geological SurveyFlorida Institute of TechnologyAlberta Agricultural Research Institute
KeywordsMagnetogramGeophysicsEarth's magnetic fieldIonospherePhysicsGeodesyDipoleEquipotentialBoundary (topology)ConvectionGeologyComputational physicsMagnetic fieldMathematical analysisMechanicsMathematicsMagnetic flux

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is shown that the convection reversal boundary is a fundamental parameter of the magnetosphere-ionosphere coupling, which determines a strong analogy between the electrostatic potential of the ionosphere and the equivalent current function in the dipole geomagnetic field approximation and the uniform ionospheric conductance. We have developed a new ground-based method for automatically diagnosing boundaries of the auroral oval using output data obtained with the magnetogram inversion technique (MIT). Using maps of the current function and field-aligned currents, calculated at the first stage of MIT with uniform ionospheric conductance, we determine the convection reversal boundary, polar cap boundary, equatorial boundary of the auroral oval, and line of maximum density of auroral electrojets. These parameters have previously been determined by a visual-manual method: analyzing maps of field-aligned and equivalent currents on the monitor screen and carrying out predetermined boundaries with the mouse — this took a very long time (weeks and months). The comparison between manually and automatically obtained boundaries has shown that the correlation coefficient between the two boundaries is, on average, 0.85, and the root-mean-square deviation does not exceed 2° in latitude. By providing an adequate accuracy for the boundary determination, the automatic method reduces the time for map processing by a factor of 2–3 (to minutes and hours), releasing a researcher from laborious visual work. The new method is implemented as one of the important modules in the updated MIT software.

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 score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSolar-Terrestrial PhysicsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207