Raytracing Study of Source Regions of Whistler Mode Wave Power Distribution Relative to the Plasmapause
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A comprehensive numerical raytracing study of whistler mode wave power with the inclusion of finite background electron and ion temperature is performed in order to investigate wave power distribution in relation to the plasmapause. Both Landau damping and linear growth of whistler mode waves are taken into account using a bi‐Maxwellian hot electron distribution as well as an isotropic hot electron distribution. Isotropic and bi‐Maxwellian distributions yield similar results of statistical spatial wave power for frequencies below 500 Hz. The effect of finite background temperature of ∼1 eV for electrons and ions are secondary in terms of the spatial distribution of whistler mode waves relative to the plasmapause. Three primary equatorial source locations at L=2, Lpp and L=5, corresponding to within the plasmasphere, at the plasmapause and outside the plasmapause, are investigated for MLT values of 00, 06, 12, and 18. At each location, waves are launched with a range of initial wave normal angles (−70° to 20°). The simulated wave power distributions are compared with observations from the EMFISIS instrument on Van Allen Probe A. Correspondence between the simulated distribution and the observations requires a weighting of the source regions. Results suggest that the majority of whistler mode power in the plasmasphere is sourced from within the plasmasphere itself and near the plasmapause. Only at noon (MLT 12) is wave power sourced primarily from at and outside the plasmapause.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".