MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408397934 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453116

Theoretical relations between model parameters and Metis observables for eruptive prominences and coronal mass ejections

2025· article· en· W4408397934 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Jejčič, P. Heinzel, S. Gunár

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RSVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVAkademie Věd České RepublikyGrantová Agentura České Republiky
KeywordsPhysicsSolar prominenceCoronal mass ejectionAstrophysicsObservableAstronomyMetisCorona (planetary geology)PlasmaAstrobiologyNuclear physicsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context. We investigate the behavior of the plasma in eruptive prominences and coronal mass ejections in characteristic physical conditions. Aims. We aim to demonstrate various relations between the plasma parameters and radiation properties relevant to Solar Orbiter and Metis observations. Methods. Our method is based on 2D non-local thermodynamic equilibrium (non-LTE) modeling of moving structures that are externally illuminated from the solar disk. We have focused on temperatures below 10 5 K and a range of gas pressures to investigate the opacity effects in the L α line. Overall, we applied a large grid of isothermal and isobaric models. Results. Our results are presented in the form of various correlation plots showing relationships between the plasma parameters and radiation properties relevant to Metis observations. We also demonstrate the relative importance of radiative and collisional ionization of hydrogen and the ratio between radiative and collisional excitation of the L α line. Our results point to the need to carry out optically thick non-LTE modeling for specific plasma conditions. The visible light ( VL ) emission was also obtained for the purposes of a comparison with the Metis data.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207