Bibliography

The investigation on daytime conjugate hemispheric asymmetry along 100°E longitude using observations and model simulations: New insights

The hemispherical asymmetry of the low latitude region along 100°E ± 5°E is scrutinized for the year 2015 at magnetically conjugate points on seasonal and intra-seasonal time scales. Two conjugate Ionosonde station pairs are selected- one pair in the inner valley (from SEALION) and the other in the outer edges of the EIA region. The anomaly in the stations is estimated using the difference of low latitude NmF2 from the dip equatorial NmF2 in the same meridian. A monthly average scheme is used instead of a seasonal mean, as the month-to-month variations are found to provide intricate details. The anomaly at the conjugate stations is highly asymmetric even during the equinoctial months of March and October, whereas it is nearly symmetric during April. During June/July, the morning time hemispheric asymmetry (larger on the winter side) temporarily reduces in the midday period and then reverses sign (larger in summer) in the afternoon. The NmF2 observations suggest a close relation of hemispheric symmetry to the position of the subsolar point with respect to the dip equator and a shift/expansion of the trough region of the EIA towards the summer hemisphere. The inter-hemispheric comparison of the hmF2 suggests a strong modulating influence of meridional winds at both the inner and outer stations which depend strongly on the relative position of the subsolar point with respect to the field line geometry. Theoretical (SAMI3/SAMI2) and empirical model (IRI) simulations show a meridional movement of the EIA region with the subsolar point. The winter to summer hemisphere movement of the EIA trough and crest region is also reproduced in the GIM-TEC along 100°E for 2015. This shifting or tailoring of the trough and the crest region is attributed primarily to the meridional wind field, which varies with the shifting position of subsolar point relative to the field line geometry. The seasonal and intra-seasonal difference in the NmF2 hemispheric asymmetry is attributed to the misalignment of the two centers of power viz., the thermospheric/neutral processes and the electromagnetic forces, due to the geographic-geomagnetic offset in this longitude.

Kalita, B.; Bhuyan, P.; Nath, S.; Choudhury, M.; Chakrabarty, D.; Wang, K.; Hozumi, K.; Supnithi, P.; Komolmis, T.; . Y. Yatini, C; Le Huy, M.;

Published by: Advances in Space Research      Published on: may

YEAR: 2022     DOI: 10.1016/j.asr.2022.02.058

NmF2; asymmetry; Conjugate; EIA; model; Hemisphere; hmF2; Subsolar

Evaluation of OVATION Prime as a forecast model for visible aurorae

This study evaluates the ability of the OVATION Prime auroral precipitation model to provide operational forecasts of the visible aurora. An operational implementation would primarily provide the general public with some guidance for viewing the aurora. We evaluate the likelihood that if aurorae are predicted to be visible at a location, they will be seen there within the hour. Nighttime model forecasts were validated with Polar Ultraviolet Imager data for Kp >= 3 and for the years 1997 and 1998. The overall forecasts for a visible aurora to occur or to not occur were correct 77\% of the time. The most important prediction for public auroral viewing is that the visible aurora will occur, and these forecasts were correct 86\% of the time.

Machol, Janet; Green, Janet; Redmon, Robert; Viereck, Rodney; Newell, Patrick;

Published by: Space Weather: The International Journal of Research and Applications      Published on: 09/2012

YEAR: 2012     DOI: 10.1029/2011SW000746

AURORA; model

Global model comparison with Millstone Hill during September 2005

A direct comparison between simulation results from the Global Ionosphere Thermosphere Model (GITM) and measurements from the Millstone Hill incoherent scatter radar (ISR) during the month of September 2005 is presented. Electron density, electron temperature, and ion temperature results are compared at two altitudes where ISR data is the most abundant. The model results are produced, first using GITM running in one dimension, which allows comparison at the Millstone Hill location throughout the entire month. The model results have errors ranging from 20\% to 50\% over the course of the month. In addition, the F2 peak electron density (NmF2) and height of the peak (HmF2) are compared for the month. On average the model indicates higher peak electron densities as well as a higher HmF2. During the time period from 9 September through 13 September, the trends in the data are different than the trends in the model results. These differences are due to active solar and geomagnetic conditions during this time period. Three-dimensional (3-D) GITM results are presented during these active conditions, and it is found that the 3-D model results replicate the trends in the data more closely. GITM is able to capture the positive storm phase that occurred late on 10 September but has the most difficulty capturing the density depletion on 11 and 12 September that is seen in the data. This is probably a result of the use of statistical high-latitude and solar drivers that are not as accurate during storm time.

Pawlowski, David; Ridley, Aaron; Kim, Insung; Bernstein, Dennis;

Published by: Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics      Published on:

YEAR: 2008     DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JA012390

Ionosphere; model; incoherent scatter radar