MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415112932 · doi:10.5194/amt-19-3539-2026

Extraction of spatially confined small-scale waves from high-resolution all-sky airglow images based on machine learning

2025· article· en· W4415112932 on OpenAlexaff
Sabine Wüst, Patrick Hannawald, Rainer Lienhart, Michael Bittner

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric measurement techniques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsInfineon Technologies (Canada)
FundersBayerisches Staatsministerium für Umwelt und VerbraucherschutzDeutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt
KeywordsAirglowWavelengthTemporal resolutionImage resolutionInstabilityStability (learning theory)Position (finance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Since June 2019, a scanning airglow camera is operated operationally every night at DLR Oberpfaffenhofen (48.09° N, 11.28° E), Germany. It provides nearly all-sky images (diameter 500 km) of the OH* airglow layer (height ca. 85–87 km) with an average spatial resolution of ca. 150 m and a temporal resolution of ca. 2 min. We analyse about three years (941 nights between October 2020 and September 2023) of OH* airglow all-sky images for spatially confined wave structures with horizontal wavelengths of ca. 20 km and less. Such structures are often referred to as ripples and are considered to be instability structures. However, Li et al. (2017) showed that they could also be secondary waves. While ripples move with the background wind, secondary waves do not. To identify small-scale and spatially confined structures, we adapt and train YOLOv7 (You Only Look Once, version 7), a machine learning approach, to determine their position and extent on the sky as well as their horizontal wavelength. Those wavelengths are compared to two-dimensional FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) results. We analyse the seasonal variations in the propagation direction and horizontal wavelengths of these structures and deduce that instability signatures are observed especially in summer. Finally, we introduce a concept for “operating-on-demand” in order to derive energy dissipation rates from our measurements.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric measurement techniquesSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207