MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400335012 · doi:10.1029/2024ja032643

Not So Fast: A New Catalog of Meteor Persistent Trains

2024· article· en· W4400335012 on OpenAlexaff
L. E. Cordonnier, K. S. Obenberger, J. M. Holmes, G. B. Taylor, Denis Vida

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersAir Force Research LaboratoryAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMeteor (satellite)TrainComputer scienceMeteorologyGeologyGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the results of a nearly 2‐year long campaign to detect and analyze meteor persistent trains (PTs)—self‐emitting phenomena which can linger up to an hour after their parent meteor. The modern understanding of PTs has been primarily developed from the Leonid storms at the turn of the century; our goal was to assess the validity of these conclusions using a diverse sample of meteors with a wide range of velocities and magnitudes. To this end, year‐round observations were recorded by the Widefield Persistent Train camera, 2nd edition (WiPT2) and were passed through a pipeline to filter out airplanes and flag potential meteors. These were classified by visual inspection based on the presence and duration of trains. Observed meteors were cross‐referenced with the Global Meteor Network (GMN) database, which independently detects and calculates meteor parameters, enabling statistical analysis of PT‐leaving meteors. There were 4,726 meteors codetected by the GMN, with 636 of these leaving trains. Among these were a large population of slow, dim meteors that left PTs; these slower meteors had a greater train production rate relative to their faster counterparts. Unlike prior research, we did not find a clear magnitude cutoff or a strong association with fast meteor showers. Additionally, we note several interesting trends not previously reported, which include PT eligibility being primarily determined by a meteor's terminal height and an apparent dynamical origin dependence that likely reflects physical meteoroid properties.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207