Comparison of Very Low Frequency Wave Intensities Measured by a Low‐Altitude Spacecraft and on the Ground
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We evaluate average wave intensities at frequencies up to 10 kHz measured by two ground stations in Canada and two others in Finland at auroral and subauroral latitudes over a full year, as well as by the low‐altitude DEMETER spacecraft during the years 2004–2010. Lightning location and energy data obtained by the World Wide Lightning Location Network, along with geomagnetic activity characterized by the Kp index, are further used. Latitudinal, diurnal, and annual variations are analyzed, and the global intensities measured on the ground and by the spacecraft are systematically compared for the first time. We show that lightning‐generated waves often dominate the measured wave intensities, particularly during the night, in summer, and at higher frequencies. DEMETER observations, supported by ray‐tracing analysis, reveal a significant role of nonducted lightning‐generated whistler propagation between the hemispheres. Finally, the wave intensity response to geomagnetic activity variations is quite different on the ground compared to in space. While spacecraft‐measured wave intensities are considerably larger during periods of enhanced geomagnetic activity, the ground‐based intensities are only sporadically enhanced during geomagnetically active periods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".