Validation of Ionospheric Specifications During Geomagnetic Storms: TEC and foF2 During the 2013 March Storm Event‐II

Author:

Shim J. S.1,Song I.‐S.1ORCID,Jee G.2ORCID,Kwak Y.‐S.3ORCID,Tsagouri I.4ORCID,Goncharenko L.5,McInerney J.6ORCID,Vitt A.6ORCID,Rastaetter L.7ORCID,Yue J.78ORCID,Chou M.78ORCID,Codrescu M.9,Coster A. J.5,Fedrizzi M.9ORCID,Fuller‐Rowell T. J.9,Ridley A. J.10ORCID,Solomon S. C.6ORCID,Habarulema J. B.11ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Atmospheric Sciences Yonsei University Seoul South Korea

2. Division of Atmospheric Sciences Korea Polar Research Institute Incheon South Korea

3. Space Science Division Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute Daejeon South Korea

4. National Observatory of Athens Penteli Greece

5. Haystack Observatory Westford MA USA

6. High Altitude Observatory NCAR Boulder CO USA

7. NASA GSFC Greenbelt MD USA

8. Catholic University of America Washington DC USA

9. NOAA SWPC Boulder CO USA

10. Space Physics Research Laboratory University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI USA

11. South African National Space Agency (SANSA) Space Science Hermanus South Africa

Abstract

AbstractAssessing space weather modeling capability is a key element in improving existing models and developing new ones. In order to track improvement of the models and investigate impacts of forcing, from the lower atmosphere below and from the magnetosphere above, on the performance of ionosphere‐thermosphere models, we expand our previous assessment for 2013 March storm event (Shim et al., 2018, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002034). In this study, we evaluate new simulations from upgraded models (the Coupled Thermosphere Ionosphere Plasmasphere Electrodynamics (CTIPe) model version 4.1 and the Global Ionosphere Thermosphere Model (GITM) version 21.11) and from the NCAR Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model with thermosphere and ionosphere extension (WACCM‐X) version 2.2 including eight simulations in the previous study. A simulation from the NCAR Thermosphere‐Ionosphere‐Electrodynamics General Circulation Model version 2 (TIE‐GCM 2.0) is also included for comparison with WACCM‐X. TEC and foF2 changes from quiet‐time background are considered to evaluate the model performance on the storm impacts. For evaluation, we employ four skill scores: Correlation coefficient (CC), root‐mean square error (RMSE), ratio of the modeled to observed maximum percentage changes (Yield), and timing error (TE). It is found that the models tend to underestimate the storm‐time enhancements of foF2 (F2‐layer critical frequency) and TEC (Total Electron Content) and to predict foF2 and/or TEC better in North America but worse in the Southern Hemisphere. The ensemble simulation for TEC is comparable to results from a data assimilation model (Utah State University‐Global Assimilation of Ionospheric Measurements (USU‐GAIM)) with differences in skill score less than 3% and 6% for CC and RMSE, respectively.

Funder

Korea Polar Research Institute

Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute

Publisher

American Geophysical Union (AGU)

Subject

Atmospheric Science

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3