MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411370907 · doi:10.1029/2024sw004293

Empirical Reconstruction of Pre‐1995 Extreme Storms Using ML‐Derived Solar Wind Inputs

2025· article· en· W4411370907 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. K. Stephens, M. I. Sitnov, N. A. Tsyganenko, R. S. Weigel

Bibliographic record

VenueSpace Weather · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHeliophysics Division
KeywordsSolar windStormEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyComputer scienceGeographyPhysicsPlasma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The storm‐time geomagnetic field and electric currents are reconstructed for extreme storms before 1995: the July 1982 superstorm and the March 1989 Hydro‐Québec grid collapse event. The reconstructions are based on an improved magnetic field data mining method utilizing recently published machine learning‐derived solar wind data. The data mining reconstructions are rescaled using statistics of the nearest neighbor bins to eliminate the bias toward weaker storms. A concurrent reconstruction method provides the combined description of storms and substorms: storm and substorm features are first reconstructed independently for the inner and tail magnetosphere, respectively, and then the data fitting is reiterated using synthetic data generated using the first round of reconstructions. The data fitting procedure is further tuned to better resolve the location of the field‐aligned currents. Testing the updated methods for the November 2003 and 1982 superstorms significantly improves the validation results for in situ observations. The effect of rescaling doubles the peak ring current density (from 81 to 168 for the November 2003 storm) while the tuned fitting procedure shifts the Region‐2 field‐aligned currents equatorward to magnetic latitudes as low as . Rescaling also intensifies the equatorial currents such that X‐line arcs and even an X‐loop are formed within geosynchronous orbit, where reconnection may approach a relativistic regime. Such a change in the field topology limits the peak plasma pressure obtained from the quasi‐static force balance equation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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