MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994453307 · doi:10.1029/2019ja027684

A Gray‐Box Model for a Probabilistic Estimate of Regional Ground Magnetic Perturbations: Enhancing the NOAA Operational Geospace Model With Machine Learning

2020· article· en· W2994453307 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNuclear Safety and Security CommissionRhode Island Space Grant ConsortiumU.S. Geological SurveyHeliophysics DivisionUniversity of MichiganNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsProbabilistic logicProbabilistic forecastingDecision treeSpace weatherEnsemble forecastingWeather forecastingForecast skillStatistical model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a novel algorithm that predicts the probability that the time derivative of the horizontal component of the ground magnetic field d B / d t exceeds a specified threshold at a given location. This quantity provides important information that is physically relevant to geomagnetically induced currents (GICs), which are electric currents associated with sudden changes in the Earth's magnetic field due to space weather events. The model follows a “gray‐box” approach by combining the output of a physics‐based model with machine learning. Specifically, we combine the University of Michigan's Geospace model that is operational at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Space Weather Prediction Center, with a boosted ensemble of classification trees. We discuss the problem of recalibrating the output of the decision tree to obtain reliable probabilities. The performance of the model is assessed by typical metrics for probabilistic forecasts: Probability of Detection and False Detection, True Skill Statistic, Heidke Skill Score, and Receiver Operating Characteristic curve. We show that the ML‐enhanced algorithm consistently improves all the metrics considered.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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