MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384342569 · doi:10.1007/s11214-023-00983-x

Physical Models for Solar Cycle Predictions

2023· article· en· W4384342569 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace Science Reviews · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSolar and Space Plasma Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCollège de Bois-de-Boulogne
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesScience and Technology Facilities CouncilMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaHeliophysics DivisionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsSolar dynamoSolar cycleCoronal mass ejectionSunspotDynamoConvection zoneSpace weatherAstrophysicsSolar maximumAstronomyDynamo theorySolar windStarsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The dynamic activity of stars such as the Sun influences (exo)planetary space environments through modulation of stellar radiation, plasma wind, particle and magnetic fluxes. Energetic solar-stellar phenomena such as flares and coronal mass ejections act as transient perturbations giving rise to hazardous space weather. Magnetic fields – the primary driver of solar-stellar activity – are created via a magnetohydrodynamic dynamo mechanism within stellar convection zones. The dynamo mechanism in our host star – the Sun – is manifest in the cyclic appearance of magnetized sunspots on the solar surface. While sunspots have been directly observed for over four centuries, and theories of the origin of solar-stellar magnetism have been explored for over half a century, the inability to converge on the exact mechanism(s) governing cycle to cycle fluctuations and inconsistent predictions for the strength of future sunspot cycles have been challenging for models of the solar cycles. This review discusses observational constraints on the solar magnetic cycle with a focus on those relevant for cycle forecasting, elucidates recent physical insights which aid in understanding solar cycle variability, and presents advances in solar cycle predictions achieved via data-driven, physics-based models. The most successful prediction approaches support the Babcock-Leighton solar dynamo mechanism as the primary driver of solar cycle variability and reinforce the flux transport paradigm as a useful tool for modelling solar-stellar magnetism.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.287 · 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