MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040787100 · doi:10.1063/5.0008649

A mathematical model for the numerical simulations of traveling ionospheric disturbances/atmospheric gravity waves generated by the Joule heating

2020· article· en· W3040787100 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Nijimbere

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavelengthPhysicsIonosphereElectrojetGeophysicsJoule heatingAtmosphere (unit)Gravity waveBuoyancyMechanicsComputational physicsMeteorologyGravitational waveEarth's magnetic fieldAstrophysicsOpticsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traveling ionospheric disturbances (TIDs) and atmospheric gravity waves (AGWs) generated by the Joule heating produced from intensified auroral electrojet and/or intense particle precipitation in the auroral and subauroral regions during geomagnetic storms and which propagate downward toward the lower (neutral) atmosphere are numerically simulated using a simple two-dimensional mathematical model for internal gravity waves propagating in the lower atmosphere. An explicit expression for the Joule heating is obtained, and the characteristics of the simulated TIDs/AGWs (e.g., buoyancy frequency, wavenumbers, cutoff wavelength, speed, structures) are also examined and compared with the results obtained from observations. As may be seen in the observations, small-scale TIDs/AGWs with wavelengths shorter than 100 km, medium-scale TIDs/AGWs with wavelengths of several hundred kilometers, and large-scale TIDs/AGWs with wavelengths longer than 1000 km generated by the Joule heating were modeled and numerically simulated. For example, observations have revealed that the Joule heating can generate TID/AGW pairs. The developed numerical model was used to simulate medium-scale TID/AGW wave packet pairs, and the results (wavelength, speed, structure) are in agreement with SuperDARN observations reported by Sofko and Huang, 2000. TIDs/AGWs with shorter horizontal wavelengths are more trapped than those with longer wavelengths (medium- and large-scale TIDs/AGWs). Their cutoff horizontal wavelength was approximated using the linear stability theory of AGWs. The approximated cutoff horizontal wavelength suggests that not all simulated small-scale disturbances with horizontal wavelengths shorter than 100 km are traveling as may be seen in the observations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207