Equatorial plasma bubbles features over the Brazilian sector according to the solar cycle and geomagnetic activity level
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Equatorial plasma bubbles (EPBs) can lead to signal degradation, affecting the measurement accuracy. Studying EPBs and their characteristics has gained increasing importance. The characteristics of EPBs were investigated using the rate of total electron content (TEC) index (ROTI) maps under different solar and magnetic activity conditions during two periods: July 2014–July 2015 (solar maximum activity with F10.7: 145.9 × 10 −22 W⋅m −2 ⋅Hz −1 ) and July 2019–July 2020 (solar minimum activity with F10.7: 69.7 × 10 −22 W⋅m −2 ⋅Hz −1 ). We also divided this analysis according to the magnetic activity levels based on Kp and Dst (disturbance storm time) indices, classified as follows: quiet+ (Kp ≤3 and Dst >−30 nT), quiet− (Kp ≤3 and Dst <−30 nT), disturbed weak (−50 nT <Dst ≤−30 nT), moderate (−100 nT <Dst ≤−50 nT), and intense (Dst ≤−100 nT). The ROTI is calculated using the slant TEC with the carrier phase, and its keograms are used to extract the zonal velocity and distance. Our statistical investigation shows the occurrence rate, duration, zonal drift velocity, and inter-bubble zonal distance of EPBs over the Brazilian sector. The latitudinal extension and zonal drift velocity of EPBs are higher during the solar maximum than those in the solar minimum. In addition, EPBs are found with unusually long durations, remaining until the morning (∼12 UT), and 10% of EPB observations occurred on the winter solstice.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".