MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Analysis of Conjugate Satellite and Ground EMIC Wave Observations

2021· article· en· W3203107823 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Usanova, Lauren Blum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetospherePhysicsVan Allen ProbesComputational physicsGeophysicsVan Allen radiation beltEmic and eticRing currentEarth's magnetic fieldWave propagationPlasmasphereMagnetic fieldOpticsPlasmaNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) waves are transverse electromagnetic waves typically generated in the equatorial magnetosphere by anisotropic proton distributions. These waves can resonantly interact with multiple particle populations in the inner magnetosphere believed to be an important loss mechanism for both ring current ions and radiation belt electrons, as well as a cold plasma heating source. The spatiotemporal extent of wave activity is one of the key parameters used to quantify the effects of EMIC waves on magnetospheric plasma populations. However, from single-point spacecraft measurements or ground based observations alone, it is challenging to get the full picture of wave occurrence distributions. Due to a number of processes, ground and in situ observations of EMIC wave activity, specifically, its global occurrence, duration, and frequency often exhibit noticeable variations [1]. In particular, EMIC waves in the H+ frequency band are not always seen on the ground conjugately to locations of space observations [2]. In addition, ground and space EMIC wave distributions have different dependencies on local time, L shell, and geomagnetic activity, adding to the challenge of comparing measurements across these platforms [3]. Here we address this challenge by examining the relationship between EMIC wave occurrence and power on the Van Allen Probes and conjugate CARISMA ground magnetometer stations in the Canadian sector. We apply an automated wave detection algorithm to magnetometer data [4]. We present an analysis of long-term simultaneous EMIC wave observations in space and on the ground, and study wave propagation characteristics in the He+ and H+ frequency bands during different geomagnetic conditions.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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