Ba. NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING ORGANIZATION 8b. OFFICE SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
communications, I _ _radio communications 19. ABSTRACT (Cot xoniw udncssaywdydetdmbybocAkmmbec) A study is done using two HF propagation prediction programs- 'RADAR C " and "AMBCOM "- to determine how well they predict median values of oblique sounder data of maximum observed frequenc~ies (MOF) at high latitudes. The main differences between RADAR C and AMBCOM are the inclusion in the latter of high-latitude ionosphere and auroral absorption models, as well as a more sophisticated and V: accurate ray-tracing scheme. The data used for comparison are t4eifrror-cfeirence (Iffor the Winnipeg-Resolute Bay path in the year 1959 (also discussed by Petrie and Warren [21 and from Folkestad 31f or the Andoya-Ft. Monmouth and Andoya-College paths in 1964. The data for the Winnipeg-Resolute Bay corresponds to high sunspot number, while the others correspond to low sunspot number. Hence, this study provides information on the performance of the two programs for various high-latitude paths at both high and low sunspot number.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.513 | 0.524 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".