Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 326

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relativistic electrons in the outer radiation belt: Differentiating between acceleration mechanisms

Green, Janet C., Kivelson, M. G.·2004·Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics

Abstract

Many theoretical models have been developed to explain the rapid acceleration to relativistic energies of electrons that form the Earth's radiation belts. However, after decades of research, none of these models has been unambiguously confirmed by comparison to observations. Proposed models can be separated into two types: internal and external source acceleration mechanisms. Internal source acceleration mechanisms accelerate electrons already present in the inner magnetosphere (L < 6.6), while external source acceleration mechanisms transport and accelerate a source population of electrons from the outer to the inner magnetosphere. In principle, the two types of acceleration mechanisms can be differentiated because they imply that different radial gradients of electron phase space density expressed as a function of the three adiabatic invariants will develop. Model predictions can be tested by transforming measured electron flux (given as a function of pitch angle, energy, and position) to phase space density as a function of the three invariants, μ, K, and Φ. The transformation requires adoption of a magnetic field model. Phase space density estimates have, in the past, produced contradictory results because of limited measurements and field model errors. In this study we greatly reduce the uncertainties of previous work and account for the contradictions. We use data principally from the Polar High Sensitivity Telescope energetic detector on the Polar spacecraft and the Tsyganenko and Stern [1996] field model to obtain phase space density. We show how imperfect magnetic field models produce phase space density errors and explore how those errors modify interpretations. On the basis of the analysis we conclude that the data are best explained by models that require acceleration of an internal source of electrons near L* ∼ 5. We also suggest that outward radial diffusion from a phase space density peak near L* ∼ 5 can explain the observed correspondence between flux enhancements at geostationary orbit and increases in ULF wave power.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2003ja010153

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 326

Metadata

Authors
Green, J. C., & Kivelson, M. G.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics
Published
2004-03
Volume
109
Issue
A3
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093386210
Cited by
326
References
14
FWCI
11.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Relativistic electrons in the outer radiation belt: Differentiating between acceleration mechanisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2003ja010153
The paper
Green, J. C., & Kivelson, M. G. (2004). Relativistic electrons in the outer radiation belt: Differentiating between acceleration mechanisms. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003ja010153

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.