MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042487541 · doi:10.1029/2019ja027291

On O<sup>+</sup> Ion Heating by BBELF Waves at Low Altitude: Test Particle Simulations

2020· article· en· W3042487541 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGyroradiusCyclotronIonWavelengthLong wavelength limitTest particleParticle accelerationParticle-in-cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate mechanisms of wave particle heating of ionospheric O + ions resulting from broadband extremely low frequency (BBELF) waves using numerical test particle simulations that take into account ion‐neutral collisions, in order to explain observations from the Enhanced Polar Outflow Probe (e‐POP) satellite at low altitudes ( ∼ 400 km) (Shen et al., 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JA024955 ). We argue that in order to reproduce ion temperatures observed at e‐POP altitudes, the most effective ion heating mechanism is through cyclotron acceleration by short‐scale electrostatic ion cyclotron (EIC) waves with perpendicular wavelengths λ ⊥ ≤ 200 m. The interplay between finite perpendicular wavelengths, wave amplitudes, and ion‐neutral collision frequencies collectively determine the ionospheric ion heating limit, which begins to decrease sharply with decreasing altitude below approximately 500 km, where the ratio becomes larger than 10 −3 , ν c and f c i denoting the O + ‐O collision frequency and ion cyclotron frequency. We derive, both numerically and analytically, the ion gyroradius limit from heating by an EIC wave at half the cyclotron frequency. The limit is 0.28 λ ⊥ . The ion gyroradius limit from an EIC wave can be surpassed either through adding waves with different λ ⊥ or through stochastic “breakout,” meaning ions diffuse in energy beyond the gyroradius limit due to stochastic heating from large‐amplitude waves. Our two‐dimensional simulations indicate that small‐scale (&lt;1 km) Alfvén waves cannot account for the observed ion heating through trapping or stochastic heating.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207