Strong Substorm Development From Polar‐Cap Arc Laydown Along the Auroral Poleward Boundary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Meso‐scale enhanced flow channels often extend across the polar cap from the dayside to the nightside auroral oval, where they enter the oval via localized reconnection and cause auroral oval disturbances. Examples here show such flows associated with azimuthally moving polar cap arcs that develop an equatorward portion that bends in the direction opposite to the arc's motion, becoming nearly parallel to the nightside auroral oval and possibly becoming an oval poleward boundary arc. The arcs then continue to move equatorward, and “lay down” along the auroral oval, leading to an explosive substorm onset (or expansion enhancement) that rapidly expands azimuthally with laying down of the arc, and later expands further with westward traveling surge sliding along the arc. This gives a longitudinally broad region of expansion‐phase aurora, and a similarly broad magnetic depression, indicating large and broad substorm energy release. The surge sliding along the poleward boundary arc occurs at a higher latitude than the laydown portion of onset, so that sliding leads to later magnetic depressions at locations west of the initial onset and at higher latitudes. The polar cap arc appears to be pushed equatorward and westward (for By >0) by the flow of new plasma moving across the polar cap, the arc being like a weather front that demarcates an advancing boundary between plasma regimes along polar cap field lines. The onset and expansion of the activity appear to be driven by the flow of this new plasma from the polar cap to the region of expansion phase activity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".