Detection of ionospheric response to earthquakes in Mexico: case study of September 8, 2021 and September 19, 2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explore the possibility of the ionospheric disturbance detection after two earthquakes (EQ) (Mw > 7) occurred on September 8, 2021, and September 19, 2022, in Mexico. The epicenter location, depth, focal mechanism, season and Space Weather background conditions were similar for the two EQs. The local time and the magnitude were different. Wave responses in the filtered slant TEC time series were revealed after both EQs at isolated satellite-receiver ray paths. The irregular variations exceeded the background fluctuation level and were not repeated on other days. Their form and temporal scales allowed us to associate them with the acoustic-gravity waves generated by the vertical displacement during the powerful EQs. The nighttime EQ on September 8, 2021, caused the medium-scale disturbances characterized with the N- and И-form fluctuations in TEC, a period of ~30 min and amplitudes of (0.1-0.2) TECU. The response to the daytime EQ on September 19, 2022, was of two types: smallscale disturbances N-, V-, И- and M-form with a 15 min period and amplitudes of (0.1-1.1) TECU; and medium-scale disturbances of N- and И-form with a period of ~30 min and amplitudes of (0.1-0.2) TECU. The presented conclusions for the Mexican region are preliminary as more statistics are needed.
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 | 0.001 | 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".