Geoelectric variations across the province of Manitoba in Canada during large geomagnetic storms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<!--!introduction!--><b></b> Geomagnetic field fluctuations are accompanied by the geoelectric field and currents at the surface of the Earth and in power lines. These geomagnetically induced currents flow through transformer windings where they produce partial saturation of the transformer core leading to harmonic generation, increased reactive power demand and transformer heating which can cause misoperation of protective relays, voltage sag and damage to equipment. This presentation provides an analysis of geoelectric field across the province of Manitoba in Canada caused by strong space weather events based on geomagnetic data available from two NRCan observatories (https://www.spaceweather.gc.ca/data-donnee/geomag/mp-en.php?type=magnetic) and three stations from the CARISMA array (<u>https://carisma.ca/carisma-data-repository</u>). The geomagnetic data were used together with local 1D impedance models to calculate the geoelectric fields which can affect power grids. This study includes analysis of dynamics of the geoelectric variations across the province during three significant magnetic storms: in May 1998, July, 2000 and October, 2003. All the geomagnetic stations used in this study have very similar longitude coordinates and span latitudes between 49.6<u></u><u></u>N and 58.8<u></u><u></u>N which allows us to see the longitudinal difference in the geoelectric variations, their intensity and duration, with localization of the largest disturbances in the geoelectric fields. Mapping for these events demonstrates the variation of amplitude and direction of the geoelectric field during the most active periods. The study also demonstrates the influence from local conductivity models to the geoelectric field calculations. This geoelectric hazard assessment provides information that can be used by a power company to mitigate risks from space weather events.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".