MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200497615 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141665

Numerical evaluation of time-distance helioseismic sensitivity kernels in spherical geometry

2021· article· en· W4200497615 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jishnu Bhattacharya

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityNew York University Abu Dhabi
KeywordsSpherical harmonicsPhysicsLine-of-sightComputationVector spherical harmonicsSensitivity (control systems)Kernel (algebra)Projection (relational algebra)Vector fieldMathematical analysisRotation (mathematics)GeometryAlgorithmAstrophysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. Helioseismic analysis of large-scale flows and structural inhomogeneities in the Sun requires the computation of sensitivity kernels that account for the spherical geometry of the Sun, as well as systematic effects such as line-of-sight projection. Aims. I aim to develop a code to evaluate helioseismic sensitivity kernels for flows using line-of-sight projected measurements. Methods. I decomposed the velocity field in a basis of vector spherical harmonics and computed the kernel components corresponding to the coefficients of velocity in this basis. The kernels thus computed are radial functions that set up a 1.5D inverse problem to infer the flow from surface measurements. I demonstrate that using the angular momentum addition formalism lets us express the angular dependence of the kernels as bipolar spherical harmonics, which may be evaluated accurately and efficiently. Results. Kernels for line-of-sight projected measurements may differ significantly from those that don’t account for projection. Including projection in our analysis does not increase the computational time significantly. We demonstrate that it is possible to evaluate kernels for pairs of points that are related through a rotation by linearly transforming the terms that enter the expression of the kernel, and that this result holds even for line-of-sight projected kernels. Conclusions. I developed a Julia code that may be used to evaluate sensitivity kernels for seismic wave travel times computed using line-of-sight projected measurements, which is made freely available under the MIT license.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsFrench-language works237,207