Nightside High‐Latitude Phase and Amplitude Scintillation During a Substorm Using 1‐Second Scintillation Indices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We examined evolution of Global Positioning System (GPS) scintillation during a substorm in the nightside high latitude ionosphere, using 1‐s phase and amplitude scintillation indices from the Canadian High Arctic Ionospheric Network (CHAIN) network. The traditional 1‐min scintillation indices showed that the phase scintillation was dominant, while the amplitude scintillation was weak. However, the 1‐s amplitude scintillation occurred more often in association with major auroral structures (polar cap arc, growth phase arc, onset arc, poleward expanding arc, poleward boundary intensification, and diffuse aurora) that were detected by the THEMIS all‐sky imagers (ASIs). The 1‐min index missed much of the amplitude fluctuations because they only lasted ∼10 s near a local peak or at the gradients of the auroral structures. The 1‐s phase scintillation was concurrent with the amplitude scintillation but was much weaker than the 1‐min phase scintillation. The frequency spectral analysis showed that the spectral power above ∼1 Hz was diffractive and below ∼1 Hz was refractive. We suggest that the amplitude scintillation in the high‐latitude ionosphere is much more common than previously considered, and that a short time window of the order of 1 s should be used to detect the scintillation. The 1‐min phase scintillation index is largely influenced by refractive effects due to total electron content (TEC) variations, and the spectral power below ∼1 Hz should be removed to identify diffractive scintillation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".