MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401691321 · doi:10.31857/s0002333724040071

An approach to interpreting natural indicators of the state of space weather to assess the effects of its impact on high-latitude power systems

2024· article· en· W4401691321 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aleksandra Vorobeva, A. N. Lapinb, Anatoly Soloviev, Gulnara Vorobeva

Bibliographic record

VenueФизика земли · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEconomic and Technological Developments in Russia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural (archaeology)Space weatherSpace (punctuation)LatitudePower (physics)State (computer science)Environmental scienceMeteorologyClimatologyComputer scienceGeographyGeologyPhysicsGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamic exploration and development of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation is inextricably connected with the need to minimize technospheric risks, including those associated with the space weather effects on power equipment systems operated within the boundaries of the auroral oval. At the same time, accompanying monitoring of space weather parameters and geomagnetic field variations in the Arctic is carried out only through a group of satellites and several dozen magnetic stations located mainly in the United States, Canada, northern and central Europe. Obviously, the current situation practically excludes the possibility of promptly diagnostics of the level of geoinduced currents (GIC) for most of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation, where in fact the only available indicator of the state of space weather is auroras. In the paper the authors propose an approach to interpreting the manifestation of auroras to assess the effects of space weather on objects and systems of high-latitude infrastructure. Thus, using the example of the “Vykhodnoy” substation of the “Severny Transit” main electrical network, it is shown that when recording auroras in the north, zenith and south, the most probable (averaged over 30 min) GIC level is 0.08, 0.23 and 0.68 A accordingly. In this case, the probability that the average half-hour GIC level will exceed 2 A (in the case of auroras in the north, zenith and south) is ∼6, ∼10 and ∼15%, respectively. In conclusion, ways of modernization and the limits of applicability of the proposed approach are considered.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueФизика землиSame topicEconomic and Technological Developments in RussiaFrench-language works237,207