MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028239528 · doi:10.1093/mnras/staa1377

White-light solar corona structure observed by naked eye and processed images

2020· article· en· W3028239528 on OpenAlexaff
V. Rušín, Paul Prikryl, Emil A. Prikryl

Bibliographic record

VenueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVSlovenská Akadémia Vied
KeywordsPhysicsCorona (planetary geology)AstronomyCoronal holeSolar windCoronal mass ejectionAstrophysicsOpticsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Light and dark adaptation and luminance contrast enhancement are well-known characteristics of human vision that allow us to observe a wide range of light intensity not fully captured in standard camera images. The naked-eye observations of total eclipses, some recorded with spectacular detail in artists’ paintings, reveal structure that is consistent with images obtained by telescopes equipped with recording media. The actual shape of the corona during a total eclipse depends not only on the phase of the solar cycle but, as can be simply demonstrated, also on the day-to-day variability and spatial distribution of coronal intensity that is determined by solar surface magnetic fields, including the locations of coronal holes that are the sources of high-speed solar wind causing geomagnetic storms. The latter were very similar for the eclipses in 1932, 1994, and 2017, which is the main reason why the naked-eye observations, as well as the processed images (1994 and 2017), of the white-light corona displayed very similar shapes. White-light corona image processing is a useful technique to enhance the contrast to observe fine-scale structure that is consistent with the physics of the solar atmosphere shaped by the magnetic field drawn out into the interplanetary space by solar wind.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.180 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical SocietySame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207