skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Calculating the High‐Latitude Ionospheric Electrodynamics Using a Machine Learning‐Based Field‐Aligned Current Model
Title: Calculating the High‐Latitude Ionospheric Electrodynamics Using a Machine Learning‐Based Field‐Aligned Current Model
Abstract We introduce a new framework called Machine Learning (ML) based Auroral Ionospheric electrodynamics Model (ML‐AIM). ML‐AIM solves a current continuity equation by utilizing the ML model of Field Aligned Currents of Kunduri et al. (2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA027908), the FAC‐derived auroral conductance model of Robinson et al. (2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA028008), and the solar irradiance conductance model of Moen and Brekke (1993,https://doi.org/10.1029/92gl02109). The ML‐AIM inputs are 60‐min time histories of solar wind plasma, interplanetary magnetic fields (IMF), and geomagnetic indices, and its outputs are ionospheric electric potential, electric fields, Pedersen/Hall currents, and Joule Heating. We conduct two ML‐AIM simulations for a weak geomagnetic activity interval on 14 May 2013 and a geomagnetic storm on 7–8 September 2017. ML‐AIM produces physically accurate ionospheric potential patterns such as the two‐cell convection pattern and the enhancement of electric potentials during active times. The cross polar cap potentials (ΦPC) from ML‐AIM, the Weimer (2005,https://doi.org/10.1029/2004ja010884) model, and the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN) data‐assimilated potentials, are compared to the ones from 3204 polar crossings of the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program F17 satellite, showing better performance of ML‐AIM than others. ML‐AIM is unique and innovative because it predicts ionospheric responses to the time‐varying solar wind and geomagnetic conditions, while the other traditional empirical models like Weimer (2005,https://doi.org/10.1029/2004ja010884) designed to provide a quasi‐static ionospheric condition under quasi‐steady solar wind/IMF conditions. Plans are underway to improve ML‐AIM performance by including a fully ML network of models of aurora precipitation and ionospheric conductance, targeting its characterization of geomagnetically active times.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1935110 2002574 1920965 1919310
PAR ID:
10522756
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
AGU
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Space Weather
Volume:
22
Issue:
4
ISSN:
1542-7390
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; (, Geophysical Research Letters)
    Abstract The electric fields of subauroral polarization streams (SAPS) have been suggested to affect energetic charged particles' dynamics in the inner magnetosphere, though their role on radiation belt electrons has never been properly quantified. A moderate geomagnetic storm on 2015‐09‐07 caused the deep injection of 10–100s of keV electrons in Earth's inner magnetosphere to low L* (L* < 4). Using a 2‐D test particle tracer, we present the effects of electric fields given by the Volland‐Stern model, a SAPS (Goldstein et al., 2005,https://doi.org/10.1029/2005ja011135) model, and a modified SAPS model on the energetic electron deep injections. The modified SAPS model reflects the SAPS electric field observations by the Van Allen Probes and is supported by Defense Meteorological Satellite Program observations. Simulations suggest that the SAPS electric field pushes 10–20 MeV/G electrons Earthward to L* ∼ 2.7 in 2.5 hr, much deeper compared to the Volland‐Stern electric field. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics)
    Abstract In Vadas et al. (2024,https://doi.org/10.1029/2024ja032521), we modeled the atmospheric gravity waves (GWs) during 11–14 January 2016 using the HIAMCM, and found that the polar vortex jet generates medium to large‐scale, higher‐order GWs in the thermosphere. In this paper, we model the traveling ionospheric disturbances (TIDs) generated by these GWs using the HIAMCM‐SAMI3 and compare with ionospheric observations from ground‐based Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receivers, Incoherent Scatter Radars (ISR) and the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN). We find that medium to large‐scale TIDs are generated worldwide by the higher‐order GWs from this event. Many of the TIDs over Europe and Asia have concentric ring/arc‐like structure, and most of those over North/South America have planar wave structure and occur during the daytime. Those over North/South America propagate southward and are generated by higher‐order GWs from Europe/Asia which propagate over the Arctic. These latter TIDs can be misidentified as arising from geomagnetic forcing. We find that the higher‐order GWs that propagate to Africa and Brazil from Europe may aid in the formation of equatorial plasma bubbles (EPBs) there. We find that the simulated GWs, TIDs and EPBs agree with EISCAT, PFISR, GNSS, and SuperDARN measurements. We find that the higher‐order GWs are concentrated at N at 200 km, in agreement with GOCE and CHAMP data. Thus the polar vortex jet is important for generating TIDs in the northern winter ionosphere via multi‐step vertical coupling through GWs. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics)
    Abstract Most ionospheric models cannot sufficiently reproduce the observed electron density profiles in the E‐region ionosphere, since they usually underestimate electron densities and do not match the profile shape. Mitigation of these issues is often addressed by increasing the solar soft X‐ray flux which is ineffective for resolving data‐model discrepancies. We show that low‐resolution cross sections and solar spectral irradiances fail to preserve structure within the data, which considerably impacts radiative processes in the E‐region, and are largely responsible for the discrepancies between observations and simulations. To resolve data‐model inconsistencies, we utilize new high‐resolution (0.001 nm) atomic oxygen (O) and molecular nitrogen (N2) cross sections and solar spectral irradiances, which contain autoionization and narrow rotational lines that allow solar photons to reach lower altitudes and increase the photoelectron flux. This work improves upon Meier et al. (2007,https://doi.org/10.1029/2006gl028484) by additionally incorporating high‐resolution N2photoionization and photoabsorption cross sections in model calculations. Model results with the new inputs show increased O+production rates of over 500%, larger than those of Meier et al. (2007,https://doi.org/10.1029/2006gl028484) and total ion production rates of over 125%, while production rates decrease by ∼15% in the E‐region in comparison to the results obtained using the cross section compilation from Conway (1988,https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA193866.pdf). Low‐resolution molecular oxygen (O2) cross sections from the Conway compilation are utilized for all input cases and indicate that is a dominant contributor to the total ion production rate in the E‐region. Specifically, the photoionization contributed from longer wavelengths is a main contributor at ∼120 km. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, AGU Advances)
    Abstract The strongest geomagnetic storm in the preceding two decades occurred in May 2024. Over these years, ground‐based observational capabilities have been significantly enhanced to monitor the ionospheric weather. Notably, the newly established Sanya incoherent scatter radar (SYISR) (Yue, Wan, Ning, & Jin, 2022,https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550‐022‐01684‐1), one of the critical infrastructures of the Chinese “Meridian Project,” provides multiple parameter measurements in the upper atmosphere at low latitudes over Asian longitudies. Unique ionospheric changes on superstorm day 11 May were first recorded by the SYISR experiments and the geostationary satellite (GEO) total electron content (TEC) network over the Asian sector. The electron density or TEC displayed wavelike structures rather than a regular diurnal pattern. Surprisingly, two humps, a common feature in the daytime equatorial ionization anomaly structure, disappeared. The SYISR observations revealed that multiple wind surges accompanied the downward phase propagation caused by atmospheric gravity waves (AGWs) originating from auroral zones. Meanwhile, strong upward and large downward drifts were respectively observed in the daytime and around sunset. The Thermosphere‐Ionosphere Electrodynamics Global Circulation Model (TIEGCM) simulations demonstrated that abnormal ionospheric changes were attributed to meridional wind disturbances associated with AGWs and recurrent penetration electric fields corresponding to largerBzsouthward excursions and disturbance dynamo. The complicated interplay between AGWs and disturbance electric fields contributed to this unique ionospheric variation. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres)
    Abstract We report on the mountain top observation of three terrestrial gamma‐ray flashes (TGFs) that occurred during the summer storm season of 2021. To our knowledge, these are the first TGFs observed in a mountaintop environment and the first published European TGFs observed from the ground. A gamma‐ray sensitive detector was located at the base of the Säntis Tower in Switzerland and observed three unique TGF events with coincident radio sferic data characteristic of TGFs seen from space. We will show an example of a “slow pulse” radio signature (Cummer et al., 2011,https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL048099; Lu et al., 2011,https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA016141; Pu et al., 2019,https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082743; Pu et al., 2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089427), a −EIP (Lyu et al., 2016,https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070154; Lyu et al., 2021,https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL093627; Wada et al., 2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031730), and a double peak TGF associated with an extraordinarily powerful and complicated positive‐polarity sferic, where each TGF peak is possibly preceded by a short burst of stepped leader emission. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Text Encoded Conversion
  • XML
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email