Interhemispheric Comparisons of Structure and Variability of the Quasi-2-Day Wave at Middle and High Latitudes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structure of the quasi-2-day wave (Q2DW) in the mesosphere and lower thermosphere (MLT) was compared between the northern and southern hemispheres, employing temperature and geopotential height data obtained from the Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) onboard NASA’s Earth Observing System (EOS) Aura satellite. The Q2DW in horizontal winds was derived using balance equations with MLS geopotential height data. Amplitudes were maximized at ~40° in summer with larger amplitudes in the meridional wind than the zonal wind in both hemispheres, but with much larger amplitudes in the southern hemisphere and a longer duration of enhancements in the northern hemisphere. Weaker enhancements were exhibited in winter in both hemispheres, but maximized at higher latitudes only in the southern hemisphere meridional component. Responses were moderately enhanced from late April to early May only in the southern hemisphere. The westward propagating zonal wavenumber 3 (W3) was largest in summer in both hemispheres, but the Q2DW comprised superposition with other modes in winter. Eliassen-Palm fluxes were derived for each mode. In the southern hemisphere, W3, W2, and W1 in January exhibited upward fluxes at lower latitudes, poleward fluxes at lower altitudes and equatorward fluxes at higher altitudes. A W3 mode in July in the northern hemisphere, on the other hand, exhibited upward and poleward fluxes in the entire altitude range. The Q2DW balance winds were compared with the radar winds. They agreed reasonably in amplitude and phase in summer in the southern hemisphere and lower latitudes in summer in the northern hemisphere and in winter hemispheres.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".