English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this second paper in the series, we investigate occurrence frequencies ofapparent unipolar processes, cancellation, and emergence of patch structures inquiet regions. Apparent unipolar events are considerably more frequent thancancellation and emergence as per our definition, which is consistent with Lambet al. (2013). Furthermore, we investigate the frequency distributions ofchanges in flux during apparent unipolar processes are and found that theyconcentrate around the detection limit of the analysis. Combining thesefindings with the results of our previous paper, Iida et al. (2012), thatmerging and splitting are more dominant than emergence and cancellation, theseresults support the understanding that apparent unipolar processes are actuallyinteractions with and among patches below the detection limit and that therestill are numerous flux interactions between the flux range in this analysisand below the detection limit. We also investigate occurrence frequencydistributions of flux decrease during cancellation. We found a relativelystrong dependence, 2.48$\pm$0:26 as a power-law index. This strong dependenceon flux is consistent with the model, which is suggested in the previous paper.

Detection of Flux Emergence, Splitting, Merging, and Cancellation of Network Fields. II Apparent Unipolar Flux Change and Cancellation