In this study, a detailed metric survey on the “Galaxy 15” (April 2010) space weather event is conducted to validate MAGNetosphere–Ionosphere–Thermosphere (MAGNIT), a semi-physical auroral ionospheric conductance model characterizing four precipitation sources, against AMPERE measurements via field-aligned current (FAC) characteristics. As part of this study, the comparative performance of three ionosphere electrodynamic specifications involving auroral conductance models, MAGNIT, Ridley Legacy Model (RLM) (empirical), and Conductance Model for Extreme Events (CMEE) (empirical), within the Space Weather Modeling Framework (SWMF), is demonstrated. Overall, MAGNIT exhibits marginally improved predictions; root mean square error values in upward and downward FACs of MAGNIT predictions compared to AMPERE data are smaller than those of CMEE and Ridley Ionosphere Model (RIM) by 12.7% and 6.24% before the storm, 4.52% and 2.13% better during the main phase, 1.98% and 1.27% worse during the second minimum, and better by 1.84% and 1.49% by the beginning of the recovery, respectively. In all three model configurations, the dusk and night magnetic local time (MLT) sectors over-predict throughout the storm, while the day and dawn MLT sectors under-predict in response to interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) conditions. In addition to accuracy and bias, similar results and conclusions are drawn from additional metrics, including in the categories of correlation, precision, extremes, and skill, and recommendations are made for the best-performing model configuration in each metric category. Visual data–model comparisons conducted by studying the FAC location and latitude/MLT spread throughout various phases of the storm suggest that the spatial extent of the FACs is captured relatively well in the night-side auroral oval, unlike in the day-side oval. The spread in latitude of the FACs matches that in the previous literature on other model performances. This information on auroral precipitation sources and their weight on FACs, along with metrics from model–data comparisons, can be used to modify MAGNIT settings to optimize SWMF model performance.
more »
« less
Conductance Model for Extreme Events: Impact of Auroral Conductance on Space Weather Forecasts
Abstract Ionospheric conductance is a crucial factor in regulating the closure of magnetospheric field‐aligned currents through the ionosphere as Hall and Pedersen currents. Despite its importance in predictive investigations of the magnetosphere‐ionosphere coupling, the estimation of ionospheric conductance in the auroral region is precarious in most global first‐principles‐based models. This impreciseness in estimating the auroral conductance impedes both our understanding and predictive capabilities of the magnetosphere‐ionosphere system during extreme space weather events. In this article, we address this concern, with the development of an advanced Conductance Model for Extreme Events (CMEE) that estimates the auroral conductance from field‐aligned current values. CMEE has been developed using nonlinear regression over a year's worth of 1‐min resolution output from assimilative maps, specifically including times of extreme driving of the solar wind‐magnetosphere‐ionosphere system. The model also includes provisions to enhance the conductance in the aurora using additional adjustments to refine the auroral oval. CMEE has been incorporated within the Ridley Ionosphere Model (RIM) of the Space Weather Modeling Framework (SWMF) for usage in space weather simulations. This paper compares performance of CMEE against the existing conductance model in RIM, through a validation process for six space weather events. The performance analysis indicates overall improvement in the ionospheric feedback to ground‐based space weather forecasts. Specifically, the model is able to improve the prediction of ionospheric currents, which impact the simulateddB/dtandΔB, resulting in substantial improvements indB/dtpredictive skill.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10375176
- Publisher / Repository:
- DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Space Weather
- Volume:
- 18
- Issue:
- 11
- ISSN:
- 1542-7390
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Faraday's law of induction is responsible for setting up a geoelectric field due to the variations in the geomagnetic field caused by ionospheric currents. This drives geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) which flow in large ground‐based technological infrastructure such as high‐voltage power lines. The geoelectric field is often a localized phenomenon exhibiting significant variations over spatial scales of only hundreds of kilometers. This is due to the complex spatiotemporal behavior of electrical currents flowing in the ionosphere and/or large gradients in the ground conductivity due to highly structured local geological properties. Over some regions, and during large storms, both of these effects become significant. In this study, we quantify the regional variability ofdB/dtusing closely placed IMAGE stations in northern Fennoscandia. The dependency between regional variability, solar wind conditions, and geomagnetic indices are also investigated. Finally, we assess the significance of spatial geomagnetic variations to modeling GICs across a transmission line. Key results from this study are as follows: (1) Regional geomagnetic disturbances are important in modeling GIC during strong storms; (2)dB/dtcan vary by several times up to a factor of three compared to the spatial average; (3)dB/dtand its regional variation is coupled to the energy deposited into the magnetosphere; and (4) regional variability can be more accurately captured and predicted from a local index as opposed to a global one. These results demonstrate the need for denser magnetometer networks at high latitudes where transmission lines extending hundreds of kilometers are present.more » « less
-
Abstract The extreme substorm event on 5 April 2010 (THEMIS AL = −2,700 nT, called supersubstorm) was investigated to examine its driving processes, the aurora current system responsible for the supersubstorm, and the magnetosphere‐ionosphere‐thermosphere (M‐I‐T) responses. An interplanetary shock created shock aurora, but the shock was not a direct driver of the supersubstorm onset. Instead, the shock with a large southward IMF strengthened the growth phase with substantially larger ionosphere currents, more rapid equatorward motion of the auroral oval, larger ionosphere conductance, and more elevated magnetotail pressure than those for the growth phase of classical substorms. The auroral brightening at the supersubstorm onset was small, but the expansion phase had multistep enhancements of unusually large auroral brightenings and electrojets. The largest activity was an extremely large poleward boundary intensification (PBI) and subsequent auroral streamer, which started ~20 min after the substorm auroral onset during a steady southward IMFBzand elevated dynamic pressure. Those were associated with a substorm current wedge (SCW), plasma sheet flow, relativistic particle injection and precipitation down to the D‐region, total electron content (TEC), conductance, and neutral wind in the thermosphere, all of which were unusually large compared to classical substorms. The SCW did not extend over the entire nightside auroral activity but was localized azimuthally to a few 100 km in the ionosphere around the PBI and streamer. These results reveal the importance of localized magnetotail reconnection for releasing large energy accumulation that can affect geosynchronous satellites and produce the extreme M‐I‐T responses.more » « less
-
Abstract The accurate determination of auroral precipitation in global models has remained a daunting and rather inexplicable obstacle. Understanding the calculation and balance of multiple sources that constitute the aurora, and their eventual conversion into ionospheric electrical conductance, is critical for improved prediction of space weather events. In this study, we present a semi‐physical global modeling approach that characterizes contributions by four types of precipitation—monoenergetic, broadband, electron, and ion diffuse—to ionospheric electrodynamics. The model uses a combination of adiabatic kinetic theory and loss parameters derived from historical energy flux patterns to estimate auroral precipitation from magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) quantities. It then converts them into ionospheric conductance that is used to compute the ionospheric feedback to the magnetosphere. The model has been employed to simulate the 5–7 April 2010Galaxy15space weather event. Comparison of auroral fluxes show good agreement with observational data sets like NOAA‐DMSP and OVATION Prime. The study shows a dominant contribution by electron diffuse precipitation, accounting for ∼74% of the auroral energy flux. However, contributions by monoenergetic and broadband sources dominate during times of active upstream solar conditions, providing for up to 61% of the total hemispheric power. The study also finds a greater role played by broadband precipitation in ionospheric electrodynamics which accounts for ∼31% of the Pedersen conductance.more » « less
-
Magnetospheric precipitation plays an important role for the coupling of Magnetosphere, Ionosphere, and Thermosphere (M-I-T) systems. Particles from different origins could be energized through various physical mechanisms and in turn disturb the Ionosphere, the ionized region of the Earth’s atmosphere that is important for telecommunication and spacecraft operations. Known to cause aurora, bright displays of light across the night sky, magnetospheric particle precipitation, modifies ionospheric conductance further affecting the plasma convection, field-aligned (FAC) and ionospheric currents, and ionospheric/thermospheric temperature and densities. Therefore, understanding the properties of different sources of magnetospheric precipitation and their relative roles on electrodynamic coupling of M-I across a broad range of spatiotemporal scales is crucial. In this paper, we detail some of the important open questions regarding the origins of magnetospheric particle precipitation and how precipitation affects ionospheric conductance. In a companion paper titled “The Significance of Magnetospheric Precipitation for the Coupling of Magnetosphere-Ionosphere-Thermosphere Systems: Effects on Ionospheric Conductance”, we describe how particle precipitation affects the vertical structure of the ionospheric conductivity and provide recommendations to improve its modelling.more » « less