MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413980876 · doi:10.1029/2025ja034327

Reassessing the Relationship Between Meteor Radio Afterglows and Optical Persistent Trains

2025· article· en· W4413980876 on OpenAlexaff
L. E. Cordonnier, K. S. Obenberger, G. B. Taylor, J. M. Holmes, Jayce Dowell, Denis Vida

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Space Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchOffice of Naval ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMeteor (satellite)TrainMeteorologyPhysicsAstronomyTelecommunicationsComputer scienceGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Meteor radio afterglows (MRAs) and optical persistent trains (PTs) are two types of long‐lived phenomena which are occasionally observed following the occurrence of a meteor. Both phenomena are thought to be produced by intrinsic emission mechanisms; PTs have been associated with chemiluminescent reactions between meteoric metals and atmospheric ozone whereas MRA emission arises due to radiation emitted by processes in the meteor's plasma trail. Previous research has identified an association between these phenomena, and proposed a mechanism by which the reactions responsible for PTs could also fuel MRAs. In this work, we investigate said connection using a substantially larger catalog containing hundreds of examples of each phenomenon. Using meteor data from the Global Meteor Network (GMN), we performed a directed search in all‐sky radio images obtained by the Long Wavelength Array (LWA) radio telescope to identify meteors with MRAs. The resulting catalog spanned nearly 2 years and contained a total of 2,887 meteors, with 675 MRA events and 372 PTs. Statistical analyses suggest that the connection between the two phenomena is not as strong as previously supposed. Additionally, we show that the MRA occurrence rates do not have a strong seasonal dependence, meteoroid strength dependence, or preference between meteor showers and sporadics. Interestingly, we find that a meteor's entry angle appears to play a significant role in whether an MRA is observed.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Space PhysicsSame topicAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207