MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400367215 · doi:10.5194/amt-17-3995-2024

Wind comparisons between meteor radar and Doppler shifts in airglow emissions using field-widened Michelson interferometers

2024· article· en· W4400367215 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Samuel Kristoffersen, W. E. Ward, C. E. Meek

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric measurement techniques · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersEurostarsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space AgencyNational Institute of Polar ResearchEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaGovernment of CanadaCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesCanada Foundation for InnovationOntario Research FoundationNova Scotia Research Innovation TrustOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsAirglowRadarMesopauseMeteor (satellite)Doppler effectAtmospheric sciencesRemote sensingPhysicsEnvironmental scienceGeodesyMesosphereMeteorologyGeologyStratosphereAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Upper-atmosphere winds from a meteor radar and a field-widened Michelson interferometer, co-located at the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory in Eureka, Nunavut, Canada (80° N, 86° W) are compared. The two instruments implement different wind-measuring techniques at similar heights and have very different temporal and spatial observational footprints. The meteor radar provides winds averaged over a ∼ 300 km horizontal area in 3 km vertical bins between 82 and 97 km on a 1 h cadence. The E-Region Wind Interferometer II (ERWIN) provides airglow-weighted winds (averaged over volumes of ∼ 8 km in height by ∼ 5 km radius) from three nightglow emissions (O( 1 S), oxygen green line, 557.7 nm, 97 km; an O 2 line, 866 nm, 94 km; and an OH line, 843 nm, 87 km) on a ∼ 5 min cadence. ERWIN's higher precision (1–2 m s −1 for the O( 1 S) and OH emissions and ∼ 4 m s −1 for the O 2 emissions) and higher cadence allows more substantive comparisons between winds measured by meteor radar and Doppler shifts in airglow emissions than previously possible for similar meteor radar/airglow Doppler shift comparisons using Fabry–Perot interferometers. The best correlation is achieved using Gaussian weighting of meteor radar winds with peak height and vertical width being optimally determined. Peak heights agree well with co-located SABER airglow observations. Offsets between the two instruments are ∼ 1–2 m s −1 for the O 2 and O( 1 S) emissions and less than 0.3 m s −1 for the OH emission. Wind directions are highly correlated with a ∼ 1:1 correspondence. On average, meteor radar wind magnitudes are ∼ 40 % larger than those from ERWIN. Gravity wave airglow brightness weighting of observations is discussed. Non-quadrature phase offsets between the airglow weighting and gravity wave associated wind and temperature perturbations will result in enhanced or reduced layer-weighted wind amplitudes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.273
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric measurement techniquesSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207