MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4384341521 · doi:10.1029/2023gl103970

Post‐Sunset Field‐Line Resonances at Equatorial Latitudes Observed by Swarm

2023· article· en· W4384341521 on OpenAlexafffund
Hossein Ghadjari, D. J. Knudsen, S. Skone

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Space AgencyEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsIonosphereSunsetPoynting vectorField linePhysicsGeophysicsConjugate pointsMagnetic fieldHarmonicsLatitudeField (mathematics)GeologyAltitude (triangle)MagnetometerGeodesyComputational physicsMathematicsGeometryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study employing data from the Swarm satellites at an altitude of ≈500 km, we present evidence of field‐line resonances (FLRs) in the Pc2‐3 (0.02–0.2 Hz) frequency band in the undisturbed post‐sunset region of the equatorial ionosphere. We identify 26 events extending to magnetic latitudes as low as 2°, which was previously thought to be too low for FLRs to exist due to ionospheric damping. Identification of FLRs is supported by a narrow‐band fundamental and first harmonics, an oscillating field‐aligned Poynting vector, a relative phase shift between E and δB of ≈90°, and in one case observation of one wave in conjugate hemispheres by two satellites separated by 4 min. We show that, contrary to the non‐uniform trend of ground‐based observations, the fundamental frequencies of these occurrences decline monotonically with increasing field‐line length. Their frequencies differ from those of ground‐based magnetometer observations reported in the literature.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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