One-Day-Shock, Two-Days-Shock and Three-Days-Shocks foF2 Diurnal Variation with Solar Cycle Phases at Ouagadougou Station from 1966 to 1998. Comparison with IRI 2012 Predictions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present work concerns foF2 time variation at Ouagadougou station for three solar cycles (from cycle 20 to cycle 22). We not only investigate solar cycle phase dependence under shock activity that is divided into one-shock-activity, two-shock-activity and three-shock-activity but also compare the IRI 2012 model values with the data carried out at Ouagadougou station. This study reveals that there is no one-day-shock during solar minimum phase. For the other solar cycle phases IRI 2012 reproduces the ionosphere electrodynamics at daytime except during the increasing phase. During night time the model is not suitable. The best subroutine under one-day-shock activity is URSI for increasing and decreasing phases. During the maximum phase it is CCIR. For two-days-shock activity IRI 2012 reproduces the ionosphere electrodynamics during the minimum and the increasing phases. The best subroutine is CCIR during the minimum phase and URSI for the other solar cycle phases. For three-days-shock activity IRI 2012 is not suitable. The best model is URSI for all solar cycle phases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".