MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204359509 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2021.3113778

Multifrequency Observation of High Latitude Scintillation: A Comparison With the Phase Screen Model

2021· article· en· W3204359509 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kaili Song, K. Meziane, Anton Kashcheyev, P. T. Jayachandran

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScintillationInterplanetary scintillationIonospherePhysicsMathematicsAlgorithmOpticsAstronomyQuantum mechanicsDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using multifrequency global positioning system (GPS) measurements from the Canadian High Arctic Ionospheric Network (CHAIN), an assessment of the weak-scattering theory (phase screen model) of ionospheric scintillation at high latitudes is performed. Scintillation data collected by global navigation satellite system (GNSS) ionospheric scintillation and TEC monitor (GISTM) receivers of the CHAIN provide a good background for testing the phase screen theory given the weak nature of the scintillation amplitude. Sixty-four scintillation events are studied in items of their spectral characteristics and fluctuation levels. Both amplitude ( <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$S_{4}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> ) and phase ( <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\sigma _{\phi }$ </tex-math></inline-formula> ) scintillation indices, as well as the power spectral index, are determined at multiple carrier frequencies (L1 1575.42 MHz, L2 1227.60 MHz, and L5 1176.45 MHz). Using the weak scatter theory, we found that the average frequency dependence of <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$S_{4}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> is <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$f^{-1.27}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> . This implies that ionospheric irregularity spectra are steeper compared to those obtained directly from the power spectral density of signal amplitude fluctuations. Our results suggest that the frequency scaling of amplitude scintillation fails to account for the ionospheric irregularities of the smallest scales. Otherwise, the multifrequency scrutiny of the signal amplitude spectrum rollover frequency and the signal phase variation index provides results that are in good agreement with the weak scatter theory.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207