Feed aggregator

Exploring Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks for Hyperspectral Crop Classification−An Evaluative Study

Publication date: Available online 17 February 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research

Author(s): Shruti Gupta, Ashish Kumar, R.D. Garg, Neeraj Jain

LEO-augmented Real-Time Kinematic with different multi-GNSS/multi-frequency combinations

Publication date: Available online 17 February 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research

Author(s): Yang Sun, Pan Li, Liang Zhang, Zhiyuan Wu, Jingkai Yuan, Mingbao Wei, Meifang Wu, Kan Wang, Bao Shu, Guanwen Huang, Qin Zhang

Prediction-based strategies for robust near real-time GPS signal anomaly detection on a global scale

Publication date: 1 March 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 5

Author(s): Gerardo Allende-Alba, André Hauschild, Steffen Thölert, Özge Gizem Esenbuğa

A scenario-based spatiotemporal approach for analyzing the climate change environmental impacts on the wheat production and food security in Iraq

Publication date: 1 March 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 5

Author(s): Waleed Mohammed Abdulwahid, Bakhtiar Feizizadeh, Thomas Blaschke, Sadra Karimzadeh

Spatial prediction of groundwater potentiality using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system hybridized with Dandelion and Nutcracker metaheuristic algorithms

Publication date: 1 March 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 5

Author(s): Zhuo Chen

Remote sensing image change detection method based on difference-guided attention and edge-aware mechanism

Publication date: 1 March 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 5

Author(s): Jianfeng Wu, Shengtao Wei

Assessing urban flood risk in arid environments: integrating Sentinel-1 SAR and land use-based evaluation in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia

Publication date: 1 March 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 5

Author(s): Eman Albalawi

Adaptive frequency-domain synthesis and performance evaluation for wideband multi-antenna signals

Publication date: 15 February 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 4

Author(s): Xuejian Li, Hong Ma, Yiwen Jiao, Tao Wu, Xueshu Shi, Hongbin Ma, Yuxin Wang

A parametric analysis of ion-acoustic wave propagation in viscous nonthermal solar wind plasmas

Publication date: 15 February 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 4

Author(s): Souvik Das, Pralay Kumar Karmakar

Postseismic viscoelastic relaxation effect prediction of coordinate time series based on a CNN-LSTM-Attention model

Publication date: 1 March 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 5

Author(s): Zhengdong Luo, Tieding Lu, Li Yan, Qianru Chen

Late Amazonian glaciation in the Acheron Fossae region of Mars

Publication date: 15 February 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 4

Author(s): Tanisha Ghosh, Reet Kamal Tiwari, Rishitosh K. Sinha, Rajiv R. Bharti

Improved classification of star and galaxy from telescope by using a spatio-spectral feature ResNet model

Publication date: 15 February 2026

Source: Advances in Space Research, Volume 77, Issue 4

Author(s): Sevilay Tufenkci, Baris Baykant Alagoz

Improved short-term sea level change predictions achieved with better AI training

Phys.org: Earth science - Thu, 02/26/2026 - 19:10
Sea level can temporarily change for a variety of reasons—atmospheric pressure shifts and water accumulation from wind and storms, for example—which can cause flooding in coastal communities and affect maritime industry operations. The key to mitigating the effects of short-term sea level variation is accurate prediction that provides ample warning time to affected areas.

After Restructuring, NSF Wants to Hire More Staff but Reduce Solicitations

EOS - Thu, 02/26/2026 - 17:01
body {background-color: #D2D1D5;} Research & Developments is a blog for brief updates that provide context for the flurry of news regarding law and policy changes that impact science and scientists today.

After large reductions in staffing last year, the National Science Foundation (NSF) is now seeking to hire more employees.

The National Science Board, which determines NSF policies, met on 25 February. At the meeting, NSF’s chief management officer, Micah Cheatham, said the agency is seeking approval to bring staffing numbers up to “at least” a level allowed by President Trump’s federal FY26 budget request. Cheatham did not say how many staff members the agency was seeking to hire.

In 2025, NSF faced multiple waves of staffing reductions, first from a Department of Government Efficiency-related executive order on “workforce optimization,” then three additional rounds via a deferred resignation program that offered employees the choice to enter a period of administrative leave followed by resignation or retirement. In total, NSF lost 18.3% of its workforce between September 2024 and October 2025. 

“Today, we are at about 1,300 on [pay]rolls,” Cheatham said at the board meeting, “which is too low.” 

Cheatham said the 2025 staff reductions reduced the ratio of executives to nonexecutives, which he called “extreme,” and reduced bureaucratic distance between staff. “Most employees at this time last year had five layers of management between the heads of the agency and themselves. Now, today, most employees just have three layers,” he said.

 
Related

In June, NSF was also evicted from its headquarters in Alexandria, Va.. Since then, staff have been working remotely and out of multiple other government buildings.

Uncertainty over the agency’s funding, fear of retaliation, and lack of job stability led to a loss of expertise and an uptick in early retirement and resignation, a July letter from NSF employees alleged. 

Regardless, Brian Stone, NSF chief of staff and acting director, said changes to the agency last year were an opportunity to “fix things that needed to be changed.”

Fewer Grant Solicitations

At the meeting, Cheatham announced that in addition to hiring more staff, NSF also plans to cut the number of grant solicitations—opportunities offered by NSF to apply for research funding—from the current count of more than 200 to 100 or fewer. He said that fewer solicitations would reduce workload for NSF staff and also help applicants better manage their time. 

“The fewer solicitations you have, the less time grant applicants have to figure out which of our pigeonholes they fit into,” he said. “Reducing administrative burden is part of the President’s management agenda.”

Over the past year, thousands of NSF grants were terminated, spurring legal challenges. And recently, applicants for NSF’s major graduate research award noticed their applications had been returned without review, even though their proposals seemingly qualified for the program solicitation.

In the meeting, Dorota Grejner-Brzezińska a geodetic engineer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a member of the National Science Board, questioned whether fewer solicitations would result in fewer scientists receiving awards. 

Stone, in response, said that solicitations would be broader and that NSF was developing ways to better route solicitations so that they are reviewed by the correct staff.

—Grace van Deelen (@gvd.bsky.social), Staff Writer

These updates are made possible through information from the scientific community. Do you have a story about how changes in law or policy are affecting scientists or research? Send us a tip at eos@agu.org. Text © 2026. AGU. CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Except where otherwise noted, images are subject to copyright. Any reuse without express permission from the copyright owner is prohibited.

How oxygen enriched Earth's atmosphere 2.5 billion years ago

Phys.org: Earth science - Thu, 02/26/2026 - 15:00
Cyanobacteria, as they still exist today, were the first organisms to carry out photosynthesis and release oxygen. Produced in primeval oceans about 2.5 billion years ago, this oxygen accumulated in Earth's atmosphere on an immense scale. A research team led by University of Tübingen geomicrobiologist Professor Andreas Kappler has used laboratory experiments to investigate how this process was even possible, given that the iron dissolved in ocean water strongly inhibited the growth of cyanobacteria.

Rare Hot Jupiters Could Reveal How All Giant Planets Form

EOS - Thu, 02/26/2026 - 14:26

Giant Jupiter-like planets dominate the star systems they inhabit. In our own solar system, Jupiter itself is more massive than all other planets, dwarf planets, asteroids, and comets put together. Current theories suggest it shaped phenomena and features stretching from the size of Mars to the very existence of the asteroid belt.

These effects are even more powerful among the rare exoplanet specimens known as “hot Jupiters”: massive worlds orbiting much closer to their host stars than Mercury does to the Sun. Unlike other known star systems (including our own), most hot Jupiter systems don’t have inner rocky planets.

Now, a new article by Juliette Becker in The Astrophysical Journal provides a possible explanation for why many hot Jupiter and other exoplanet systems look the way they do and might even help elucidate the formation of our own solar system.

“We are approaching the point of a unified giant planet formation model, which is super exciting.”

“One of the biggest open questions in planet formation theories is, Where do hot Jupiters come from?” said Becker, a planetary scientist at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

In the new paper, she argues that the history of giant planets—and their sibling worlds—is very contingent on specific factors that determine whether the giant planets become hot Jupiters, warm Jupiters (at roughly Mercury’s distance from the Sun), or cold Jupiters (like the one in our solar system). In particular, Becker’s model shows that most hot Jupiters likely formed via an abrupt disturbance caused by a passing star or other massive object, while warm Jupiters move through their star systems via a slower process. The abrupt disturbance scenario also explains why inner planets are missing in hot Jupiter systems; the catastrophic migration of massive planets likely ejects them into interstellar space.

“The first formal question in the field of exoplanets was how hot Jupiters form,” said Brandon Radzom, a planetary scientist working jointly at Indiana University and the California Institute of Technology who was not involved in the research. “Three decades later, it feels like this field is maturing. We are approaching the point of a unified giant planet formation model, which is super exciting.”

Not Like Us

The first exoplanet discovered around an ordinary star was the hot Jupiter 51 Pegasi b, identified in 1995. As of 13 February 2026, astronomers have identified 6,107 exoplanets, of which only a few hundred are hot Jupiters. The precise number isn’t certain, partly because there isn’t a consensus on where the division lies between “hot” and “warm” Jupiters, but data and theory suggest only about 0.5% of exoplanets are hot Jupiters.

“They’re pretty rare, and that’s interesting because it tells us something about planet formation and evolution,” Radzom said.

Despite their rarity, the combination of large mass, large size, and small orbit makes hot Jupiters easier to observe than more common exoplanets. Solar system–like exoplanets (including cold Jupiters) are quite difficult to spot because their size and orbital paths make them much fainter. Instead, a large number of known exoplanets are “super-Earths”: presumably rocky worlds more massive than Earth, orbiting in the same general part of their star systems as our inner planets.

According to current planetary research, super-Earths and other rocky worlds form close to their stars, while gas giants like Jupiter form in the outer parts of a star’s protoplanetary disk of gas and dust. They first form as a dense icy core, then accrete hydrogen and other gases until they reach a large size and mass.

“I think Jupiter could have become a hot Jupiter. Luckily for us, it didn’t.”

However, giant planets don’t eat up every bit of material in the protoplanetary disk. Models show they lose some of their orbital momentum to the remaining gas and dust, which brings them closer to their host star, a slow process known as disk migration. This is one possible way to make hot and warm Jupiters.

Another way to move Jupiter-like planets toward their host stars is tidal migration, which involves gravitational perturbation from a nearby star—because many stars form in clusters—or another giant planet in the same star system. This interference can knock planets into extremely elliptical orbits that carry them close to their host star, the same process that steers comets close to the Sun. However, Jupiter-like worlds are much bigger than comets, and the tidal forces acting on them circularize their orbits over time, resulting in hot Jupiters.

Becker’s model showed that the few hot Jupiters with companion planets probably formed via disk migration, while those without companion planets very likely came about via tidal migration. Using a similar analysis, she found that many warm Jupiters could not have formed via tidal migration within the lifetime of the universe.

“I think Jupiter could have become a hot Jupiter,” Becker said. “Luckily for us, it didn’t. For a Jupiter-mass planet to become a hot Jupiter, it would require an extra-giant planet or a stellar companion or something else that would perturb [its orbit].”

Instead, many researchers think Jupiter formed about 3.5 times as far from the Sun as Earth is, drifted closer to the Sun via disk migration, then was tugged to its current position through a gravitational push and pull between the Sun and Saturn, a hypothesis known as the Grand Tack. While Becker’s paper didn’t address the Grand Tack, she found intriguing patterns that could help scientists understand how every giant planet forms and migrates, which indirectly could reveal something about our own Jupiter—and Earth.

—Matthew R. Francis (@BowlerHatScience.org), Science Writer

Citation: Francis, M. R. (2026), Rare hot Jupiters could reveal how all giant planets form, Eos, 107, https://doi.org/10.1029/2026EO260070. Published on 26 February 2026. Text © 2026. The authors. CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Except where otherwise noted, images are subject to copyright. Any reuse without express permission from the copyright owner is prohibited.

Boomerang Earthquakes Don’t Need Complex Faults

EOS - Thu, 02/26/2026 - 14:15
Editors’ Highlights are summaries of recent papers by AGU’s journal editors. Source: AGU Advances

Large earthquakes often release energy in complex ways, and some even produce boomerang ruptures that reverse direction within seconds during the same event. Such reversals can lead to stronger shaking because the fault releases energy in several bursts instead of in one continuous motion. Previously, this behavior was assumed to require geometrically complex faults with bends or branches.

Sun and Cattania [2026] show instead that faults can naturally alternate between continuous sliding and brief, traveling pulses of slip. When a rupture transitions between these modes, it can spontaneously generate a backward-moving front that fills in gaps in the slip. Boomerang earthquakes can occur on simple, straight faults when three common conditions coincide: velocity-weakening friction, rupture starting from one end rather than the center, and faults large enough for the rupture to propagate into regions of lower stress. Their model predicts that earthquakes with slower rupture speeds and lower stress drops are more prone to produce these reversals, consistent with characteristics observed in real events (e.g., the 2016 Moment Magnitude (Mw) 7.1 Romanche and 2021 Mw 7.0 Taitung earthquakes).

Because these conditions are widespread in nature, boomerang earthquakes may be far more common than we can usually detect, and the findings provide physical clues for identifying these hard-to-detect events. Although the study is theoretical, its results offer important insight into why large earthquakes behave in unexpectedly complex ways and how this complexity can influence seismic hazard.

Citation: Sun, Y., & Cattania, C. (2026). Back-propagating earthquakes on simple faults. AGU Advances, 7, e2025AV001649. https://doi.org/10.1029/2025AV001649

—Marcos Moreno, Editor, AGU Advances

Text © 2026. The authors. CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Except where otherwise noted, images are subject to copyright. Any reuse without express permission from the copyright owner is prohibited.

Understanding Aerosol-Cloud Interactions is Pivotal for Improving Climate Predictions

EOS - Thu, 02/26/2026 - 13:58
Editors’ Highlights are summaries of recent papers by AGU’s journal editors. Source: AGU Advances

The dynamics of interactions between aerosols and clouds are far from being completely understood and, therefore, it is a source of uncertainty in climate modeling. In Im et al. [2026], a call is issued to integrate into climate models, through data assimilation, the innovative and massive information provided by satellite remote sensing, ground, and airborne observations. Machine learning is proposed as a valuable resource to improve our capability of integrating several sources of information and exploring new retrieval algorithms. Furthermore, machine learning provides the means to set up climate model emulators to speed up climate modeling. The authors call for a global effort to profit from renewed international cooperation to advance our understanding of aerosol-cloud interactions, with the target of reducing uncertainty of climate projections.

Contributions to global mean surface temperature (GSAT) change (1750-2019) from individual forcing components, including uncertainties as assessed by the IPCC AR6. Credit: Im et al. [2026], Figure 1 (left panel)

Citation: Im, U., Samset, B. H., Nenes, A., Thomas, J. L., Kokkola, H., Dubovik, O., et al. (2026). Aerosol-cloud interactions: Overcoming a barrier to projecting near-term climate evolution and risk. AGU Advances, 7, e2025AV001872. https://doi.org/10.1029/2025AV001872   

—Alberto Montanari, Editor-in-Chief, AGU Advances

Text © 2026. The authors. CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Except where otherwise noted, images are subject to copyright. Any reuse without express permission from the copyright owner is prohibited.

Will melting glaciers slow climate change? A prevailing theory is on shaky ground

Phys.org: Earth science - Thu, 02/26/2026 - 10:00
For scientists who study the Southern Ocean, a long-standing silver lining in the gloomy forecast of climate change has been the theory of iron fertilization. As temperatures rise and glaciers in Antarctica melt, ice-trapped iron would feed blooms of microscopic algae, pulling heat-trapping carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow. There's just one problem: The theory doesn't hold water.

Slow and Fast Madden-Julian Oscillation Modes

EOS - Wed, 02/25/2026 - 21:30
Editors’ Highlights are summaries of recent papers by AGU’s journal editors. Source: Geophysical Research Letters

Subseasonal forecasts have skill due to the existence of the Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO), which modulates convection in the tropics while moving eastward along the equator. In a new study, Marsico et al. [2026] use a data-driven model to identify two modes of the MJO — a fast-MJO mode, with a 45-day period, and a slow-MJO mode, with a 70-day period. These two modes interact constructively and destructively and when combined can reproduce the well-known characteristics of the MJO. The authors find that if these modes and their combination are identified in subseasonal forecasts, the skill of the MJO forecasts can be improved by approximately one week, which would significantly improve the forecast skill.

Citation: Marsico, D. H., Albers, J. R., Newman, M., Gehne, M., Dias, J., Kiladis, G. N., et al. (2026). Modal interference drives Madden-Julian Oscillation evolution and predictability. Geophysical Research Letters, 53, e2025GL118062. https://doi.org/10.1029/2025GL118062  

—Suzana Camargo, Editor, Geophysical Research Letters

Text © 2026. The authors. CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Except where otherwise noted, images are subject to copyright. Any reuse without express permission from the copyright owner is prohibited.

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer