Scintillation in the Arctic during the May 2024 Mother’s Day storm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The geomagnetic storm that started on May 10th 2024, often referred to as the “Mother’s Day” or “Gannon” storm, was the strongest storm for decades,with polar lights visible across significant parts of the globe. This paper focuses on the impacts in the form of GNSS signal scintillation in the Arctic, covering the geographic area from 50 to 85° N and 160° W to 40° E. The scintillation analysis is supported by ionospheric convection data from the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN) and currents estimated from the measurements of multiple magnetometer arrays. Positioning performance is examined for a real-time kinematic (RTK) service in Tromsø, at ≈70° N. An overview of the spatial and temporal occurrence of the scintillation is presented. Scintillation was observed throughout the coverage area, in connection with the auroral oval region and a tongue of ionization. Amplitude scintillation was observed but with a lesser magnitude (S4 values up to 0.2) and extent than the phase scintillation. The connection of the scintillation to the auroral electrojets and vertical currents is examined in detail. Scintillation is found to occur within both the eastward and westward electrojets, but is not a constant feature. Phase scintillation in the eastward electrojet tends to occur near the poleward boundary. Some periods of strong vertical currents are associated with scintillation. Accurate positioning services were severely degraded during the event. For many users, they would be unusable for up to 37 consecutive hours. To the best of our knowledge, at the time of writing, this paper presents the most complete overview of high-latitude scintillations during this storm, and demonstrates the value of combining data from multiple instruments for enhanced insight.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".