Influence of the Interplanetary Magnetic Field Cone Angle on the Geometry of Bow Shocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The frozen-in interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) in the solar wind is one of the most important parameters affecting the Earth’s space weather. In the early studies of the IMF’s influence on space weather, significant effects of the north–south component of the IMF B Z were emphasized, while the radial component of the IMF B X was largely ignored. However, the IMF near the Earth is not always dominated by the north–south component of the IMF B Z , and the radial component of the IMF B X also plays an important role. However, while the effects of the IMF B X (cone angle) on the magnetopause have been studied in recent years, there has been much less effort to quantify the B X (cone angle) effects on the bow shock. In this paper, using the bow shock crossing data from multiple satellites, we investigate the IMF cone angle effect on the dayside and nightside of the bow shock. Our results show that under the radial IMF condition, the dayside of the bow shock is located closer to the Earth than the average. At the same time, on the nightside, the bow shock is farther away from the Earth than the average. The mechanism explaining the bow shock location under the radial IMF is not completely understood. We believe that the magnetosonic Mach number and unusual conditions of the magnetosheath, especially for low dynamic pressure, play an important role. In the future, more work is needed to describe the reactions of the Earth’s magnetosphere to different IMF orientations, especially to the radial IMF.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".