A Bayesian Inference‐Based Empirical Model for Scintillation Indices for High‐Latitude
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Solar wind parameters, the solar radio flux index (F10.7), the Sun's declination and the SuperMAG Electrojet index are used to construct a Bayesian inference‐based empirical model for scintillation indices (S4 and σΦ) at high latitudes. For the present study, measurements from three Global Positioning System (GPS) L1 receivers located in the auroral zone, the cusp and in the polar cap are selected, respectively. The solar wind characteristics include the solar wind speed (VSW) and ram pressure (ρSW) as well as the Geocentric Solar Magnetospheric (GSM) By and the Bz components of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF). Following a brief assessment on the independence of the variables (predictors), prior probabilities of occurrence in the case of a multinomial classification are constructed. Posterior‐probabilities are then deduced for any arbitrary set of predictors. We show that the model captures most variations seen in the measured indices whether they are associated or not with transient interplanetary events. Although the model tends to underestimate the actual phase index measurements, 95% of the validated events are predicted with an error less than 0.034 rad in σΦ. For the amplitude scintillation index, 5% of validated events have an error larger than 0.019.
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 | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".