MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118690456

Effects of cold electron number density variation on whistler-mode wave growth

2014· article· en· W3118690456 on OpenAlexaff
Rongxin Tang, Danny Summers, Xiaohua Deng

Bibliographic record

VenueEGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhistlerPhysicsElectronElectron densityWavenumberAmplitudeAtomic physicsGrowth ratePlasmaNonlinear systemMathematicsQuantum mechanics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine how the growth of magnetospheric whistler-mode waves depends on the cold (background) electron number density N-0. The analysis is carried out by varying the cold-plasma parameter a = (electron gyrofrequency)(2)/(electron plasma frequency) 2 which is proportional to 1/N-0. For given values of the thermal anisotropy A(T) and the ratio N-h/N-0, where N-h is the hot (energetic) electron number density, we find that, as N-0 decreases, the maximum values of the linear and nonlinear growth rates decrease and the threshold wave amplitude for nonlinear growth increases. Generally, as N-0 decreases, the region of (N-h/N-0, A(T))-parameter space in which nonlinear wave growth can occur becomes more limited; that is, as N-0 decreases, the parameter region permitting nonlinear wave growth shifts to the top right of (N-h/N-0, A(T)) space characterized by larger N-h/N-0 values and larger A(T) values. The results have implications for choosing input parameters for full-scale particle simulations and also in the analysis of whistler-mode chorus data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.220
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEGU General Assembly Conference AbstractsSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207