MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003969367 · doi:10.1029/2019gl085590

Multi‐Instrument Observations of Ion‐Neutral Coupling in the Dayside Cusp

2020· article· en· W3003969367 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Billett, Keisuke Hosokawa, A. Grocott, J. A. Wild, A. L. Aruliah, Yasunobu Ogawa, S. Taguchi, M. Lester

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKLancaster University
KeywordsIonospherePhysicsInterplanetary magnetic fieldSolar windGeophysicsSubstormCusp (singularity)DaytimePlasmaInterplanetary spaceflightDoppler effectJoule heatingConvectionMagnetic reconnectionAstrophysicsAtmospheric sciencesMagnetosphereAstronomyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using data from the Scanning Doppler Imager, the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network, the EISCAT Svalbard Radar, and an auroral all‐sky imager, we examine an instance of region neutral winds which have been influenced by the presence of poleward moving auroral forms near the dayside cusp region. We observe a reduction in the time taken for the ion drag force to reorientate the neutrals into the direction of the convective plasma (on the order of minutes), compared to before the auroral activity began. Additionally, because the ionosphere near the cusp is influenced much more readily by changes in the solar wind via dayside reconnection, we observe the neutrals responding to an interplanetary magnetic field change within minutes of it occurring. This has implications on the rate that energy is deposited into the ionosphere via Joule heating, which we show to become dampened by the neutral winds.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207