An Ephemeral Red Arc Appeared at 68° MLat at a Pseudo Breakup During Geomagnetically Quiet Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Various subauroral optical features have been studied by analyzing data collected during periods of geomagnetic disturbances. Most events have been typically found at geomagnetic latitudes of 45–60°. In this study, however, we present a red arc event found at geomagnetic 68° north (L ≈ 7.1) in the Scandinavian sector during a period of geomagnetically quiet conditions within a short intermission between two high‐speed solar wind events. The red arc appeared to coincide with a pseudo breakup at geomagnetic 71–72°N and a rapid equatorward expansion of the polar cap. However, the red arc disappeared in approximately 7 min. Simultaneous measurements with the Swarm A/C satellites indicated the appearance of the red arc at the ionospheric trough minimum and a conspicuous enhancement of the electron temperature, suggesting the generation of the arc by heat flux. Since there are meaningful differences in the red arc features from already‐known subauroral optical features such as the stable auroral red (SAR) arc, we considered that the red arc is a new phenomenon. We suggest that the ephemeral red arc may represent the moment of SAR arc birth associated with substorm particle injection, which is generally masked by bright dynamic aurorae.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".