MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3195111283 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141470

Triple-frequency meteor radar full wave scattering

2021· article· en· W3195111283 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gunter Stober, Peter Brown, M. Campbell‐Brown, R. Weryk

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNuclear Safety and Security CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsUniversity of BernNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsComputational physicsRadarPhysicsAmbipolar diffusionAmplitudeScatteringEcho (communications protocol)RADIUSElectron densityGaussianMeteor (satellite)ElectronOpticsMeteorologyQuantum mechanicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. Radar scattering from meteor trails depends on several poorly constrained quantities, such as electron line density, q, initial trail radius, r0, and ambipolar diffusion coefficient, D. Aims. The goal is to apply a numerical model of full wave backscatter to triple frequency echo measurements to validate theory and constrain estimates of electron radial distribution, initial trail radius, and the ambipolar diffusion coefficient. Methods. A selection of 50 transversely polarized and 50 parallel polarized echoes with complete trajectory information were identified from simultaneous tri-frequency echoes recorded by the Canadian Meteor Orbit Radar. The amplitude-time profile of each echo was fit to our model using three different choices for the radial electron distribution assuming a Gaussian, parabolic-exponential, and 1-by-r2 electron line density model. The observations were manually fit by varying, q, r0, and D per model until all three synthetic echo-amplitude profiles at each frequency matched observation. Results. The Gaussian radial electron distribution was the most successful at fitting echo power profiles, followed by the 1∕r2. We were unable to fit any echoes using a profile where electron density varied from the trail axis as an exponential-parabolic distribution. While fewer than 5% of all examined echoes had self-consistent fits, the estimates of r0 and D as a function of height obtained were broadly similar to earlier studies, though with considerable scatter. Most meteor echoes are found to not be described well by the idealized full wave scattering model.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics→French-language works237,207→