MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402141901 · doi:10.1029/2024sw003916

On the Use of SuperDARN Ground Backscatter Measurements for Ionospheric Propagation Model Validation

2024· article· en· W4402141901 on OpenAlexafffund
Joshua Ruck, David R. Themens, P. V. Ponomarenko, A. G. Burrell, B. Kunduri, J. M. Ruohoniemi, Sean Elvidge

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace Weather · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKCanadian Space AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBackscatter (email)IonosphereRemote sensingGeodesyGeologyGeophysicsComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Prior to use in operational systems, it is essential to validate ionospheric models in a manner relevant to their intended application to ensure satisfactory performance. For Over‐the‐Horizon radars (OTHR) operating in the high‐frequency (HF) band (3–30 MHz), the problem of model validation is severe when used in Coordinate Registration (CR) and Frequency Management Systems (FMS). It is imperative that the full error characteristics of models is well understood in these applications due to the critical relationship they impose on system performance. To better understand model performance in the context of OTHR, we introduce an ionospheric model validation technique using the oblique ground backscatter measurements in soundings from the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN). Analysis is performed in terms of the F‐region leading edge (LE) errors and assessment of range‐elevation distributions using calibrated interferometer data. This technique is demonstrated by validating the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) 2016 for January and June in both 2014 and 2018. LE RMS errors of 100–400 km and 400–800 km are observed for winter and summer months, respectively. Evening errors regularly exceeding 1,000 km across all months are identified. Ionosonde driven corrections to the IRI‐2016 peak parameters provide improvements of 200–800 km to the LE, with the greatest improvements observed during the nighttime. Diagnostics of echo distributions indicate consistent underestimates in model NmF2 during the daytime hours of June 2014 due to offsets of −8° being observed in modeled elevation angles at 18:00 and 21:00 UT.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpace WeatherSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207