Abstract
Because of the small number of spacecraft available in the Earth’s magnetosphere
at any given time, it is not possible to obtain direct measurements of the fundamental
quantities, such as the magnetic field and plasma density, with a spatial coverage
necessary for studying, global magnetospheric phenomena. In such cases, empirical as
well as physics-based models are proven to be extremely valuable. This requires not only
having high fidelity and high accuracy models, but also knowing the weakness and
strength of such models. In this study, we assess the accuracy of the widely used
Tsyganenko magnetic field models, T96, T01, and T04, by comparing the calculated
magnetic field with the ones measured in-situ by the GOES satellites during
geomagnetically disturbed times. We first set the baseline accuracy of the models from a
data-model comparison during the intervals of geomagnetically quiet times. During quiet
times, we find that all three models exhibit a systematic error of about 10% in the
magnetic field magnitude, while the error in the field vector direction is on average
less than 1%. We then assess the model accuracy by a data-model comparison during twelve
geomagnetic storm events. We find that the errors in both the magnitude and the
direction are well maintained at the quiet-time level throughout the storm phase, except
during the main phase of the storms in which the largest error can reach 15% on average,
and exceed well over 70% in the worst case. Interestingly, the largest error occurs not
at the Dst minimum but 2–3 hours before the minimum. Finally, the T96 model has
consistently underperformed compared to the other models, likely due to the lack of
computation for the effects of ring current. However, the T96 and T01 models are
accurate enough for most of the time except for highly disturbed periods.
Publisher
The Korean Space Science Society
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Physics and Astronomy
Reference15 articles.
1. Gold T, Motions in the magnetosphere of the Earth, J. Geophys.
Res. 64, 1219-1224 (1959). 10.1029/JZ064i009p01219
2. Lakhina GS, Alex S, Tsurutani BT, Gonzalez WD, Research on
historical records of geomagnetic storms, Proc. Int. Astron. Union 2004, 3-15 (2004).
10.1017/S1743921305000074
3. Lee DY, Hwang JA, Min KW, Lee ES, Cho KS, et al., A statistical
study of magnetic storm recovery phase: preliminary results, J. Astron. Space Sci. 18,
27-32 (2001).
4. Moon GH, Variation of magnetic field (By, Bz) polarity and
statistical analysis of solar wind parameters during the magnetic storm period, J.
Astron. Space Sci. 28, 123-132 (2011). 10.5140/JASS.2011.28.2.123
5. Papitashvili NE, King JH, A draft high resolution OMNI data set,
Proceedings of the 2006 AGU Fall Meetings, San Francisco, CA, 10-15 Dec 2006.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Latest Research Trends on Space Environments in Korea;Journal of Space Technology and Applications;2023-11