MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997796687 · doi:10.1029/2019ja027020

Polar Ionospheric Large‐Scale Structures and Dynamics Revealed by TEC Keogram Extracted From TEC Maps

2019· article· en· W2997796687 on OpenAlexaff
Yanling Wang, Qinghe Zhang, Yu‐Zhang Ma, P. T. Jayachandran, Zan‐Yang Xing, N. Balan, Shun‐Rong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China-Yunnan Joint FundNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsTECIonospherePolarGeologyTotal electron contentGeodesyGeophysicsMeridian (astronomy)PhysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A method named total electron content (TEC) keogram is introduced for surveying the large‐scale irregularities continuously in the polar ionosphere. The TEC keogram is developed from a movie of TEC maps along various meridian lines from the dayside to the nightside across the magnetic pole, trying to identify and track several types of ionospheric structures. Through two examples, a clear train of polar cap patches are identified from TEC keogram and confirmed by SuperDARN radar observations. The motion speed of these patches estimated from this tool agrees with SuperDARN radar measurements. Then, the motions of patches relative to the background convection through the whole polar cap are statistically studied for the first time. Moreover, the occurrence dependence of fully tracked patches on months, UT hours, and interplanetary magnetic field conditions is generally consistent with previous reports. These results suggest that the TEC keogram offers a power tool for continuous monitoring and studying of large‐scale plasma irregularities in the polar ionosphere.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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