The Occurrence of Embedded Region 1 and 2 Currents Depends on Geomagnetic Activity Level
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Embedded Region 1 and 2 field‐aligned currents (FACs), intense FAC layers of mesoscale latitudinal width near the interface between large‐scale Region 1 and Region 2 FACs, are related to dramatic phenomena in the ionosphere such as discrete arcs, inverted‐V precipitation, and dawnside auroral polarization streams. These relationships suggest that the embedded FACs are potentially important for understanding ionospheric heating and magnetosphere‐ionosphere (M‐I) coupling and instabilities. Previous case studies of embedded FACs have led to the speculation that they may result from enhanced M‐I convection during active times. To explore this idea further, we investigate statistically their occurrence rates under a variety of geomagnetic conditions with a large event list constructed from 17 years of Defense Meteorological Satellite Program observations. The identification procedure is fully automated and explicit. The statistical results indicate that embedded Region 1 and 2 FACs are common, and that they have a higher chance to occur when the level of geomagnetic activity is higher (given by various indices), supporting the idea that they result from enhanced M‐I convection.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".