Search for: All records

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 (Φ_PC) 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.

 

Forecasting ground magnetic field perturbations has been a long-standing goal of the space weather community. The availability of ground magnetic field data and its potential to be used in geomagnetically induced current studies, such as risk assessment, have resulted in several forecasting efforts over the past few decades. One particular community effort was the Geospace Environment Modeling (GEM) challenge of ground magnetic field perturbations that evaluated the predictive capacity of several empirical and first principles models at both mid- and high-latitudes in order to choose an operative model. In this work, we use three different deep learning models-a feed-forward neural network, a long short-term memory recurrent network and a convolutional neural network-to forecast the horizontal component of the ground magnetic field rate of change ( dB H / dt ) over 6 different ground magnetometer stations and to compare as directly as possible with the original GEM challenge. We find that, in general, the models are able to perform at similar levels to those obtained in the original challenge, although the performance depends heavily on the particular storm being evaluated. We then discuss the limitations of such a comparison on the basis that the original challenge was not designed with machine learning algorithms in mind. 

An important question that is being increasingly studied across subdisciplines of Heliophysics is “how do mesoscale phenomena contribute to the global response of the system?” This review paper focuses on this question within two specific but interlinked regions in Near-Earth space: the magnetotail’s transition region to the inner magnetosphere and the ionosphere. There is a concerted effort within the Geospace Environment Modeling (GEM) community to understand the degree to which mesoscale transport in the magnetotail contributes to the global dynamics of magnetic flux transport and dipolarization, particle transport and injections contributing to the storm-time ring current development, and the substorm current wedge. Because the magnetosphere-ionosphere is a tightly coupled system, it is also important to understand how mesoscale transport in the magnetotail impacts auroral precipitation and the global ionospheric system response. Groups within the Coupling, Energetics and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions Program (CEDAR) community have also been studying how the ionosphere-thermosphere responds to these mesoscale drivers. These specific open questions are part of a larger need to better characterize and quantify mesoscale “messengers” or “conduits” of information—magnetic flux, particle flux, current, and energy—which are key to understanding the global system. After reviewing recent progress and open questions, we suggest datasets that, if developed in the future, will help answer these questions. 

With the availability of data and computational technologies in the modern world, machine learning (ML) has emerged as a preferred methodology for data analysis and prediction. While ML holds great promise, the results from such models are not fully unreliable due to the challenges introduced by uncertainty. An ML model generates an optimal solution based on its training data. However, if the uncertainty in the data and the model parameters are not considered, such optimal solutions have a high risk of failure in actual world deployment. This paper surveys the different approaches used in ML to quantify uncertainty. The paper also exhibits the implications of quantifying uncertainty when using ML by performing two case studies with space physics in focus. The first case study consists of the classification of auroral images in predefined labels. In the second case study, the horizontal component of the perturbed magnetic field measured at the Earth’s surface was predicted for the study of Geomagnetically Induced Currents (GICs) by training the model using time series data. In both cases, a Bayesian Neural Network (BNN) was trained to generate predictions, along with epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties. Finally, the pros and cons of both Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) models and Bayesian Deep Learning (DL) are weighed. The paper also provides recommendations for the models that need exploration, focusing on space weather prediction. 

During periods of rapidly changing geomagnetic conditions electric fields form within the Earth’s surface and induce currents known as geomagnetically induced currents (GICs), which interact with unprotected electrical systems our society relies on. In this study, we train multi-variate Long-Short Term Memory neural networks to predict magnitude of north-south component of the geomagnetic field (| B N |) at multiple ground magnetometer stations across Alaska provided by the SuperMAG database with a future goal of predicting geomagnetic field disturbances. Each neural network is driven by solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field inputs from the NASA OMNI database spanning from 2000–2015 and is fine tuned for each station to maximize the effectiveness in predicting | B N |. The neural networks are then compared against multivariate linear regression models driven with the same inputs at each station using Heidke skill scores with thresholds at the 50, 75, 85, and 99 percentiles for | B N |. The neural network models show significant increases over the linear regression models for | B N | thresholds. We also calculate the Heidke skill scores for d| B N |/dt by deriving d| B N |/dt from | B N | predictions. However, neural network models do not show clear outperformance compared to the linear regression models. To retain the sign information and thus predict B N instead of | B N |, a secondary so-called polarity model is utilized. The polarity model is run in tandem with the neural networks predicting geomagnetic field in a coupled model approach and results in a high correlation between predicted and observed values for all stations. We find this model a promising starting point for a machine learned geomagnetic field model to be expanded upon through increased output time history and fast turnaround times. 

The geospace response to coronal mass ejections includes phenomena across many regions, from reconnection at the dayside and magnetotail, through the inner magnetosphere, to the ionosphere, and even to the ground. Phenomena occurring in each region are often connected to each other through the magnetic field, but that field undergoes dynamic changes during storms and substorms. Improving our understanding of the geospace response to storms requires a global picture that enables us to observe all the regions simultaneously with both spatial and temporal resolution. Using the Energetic Neutral Atom (ENA) imager on the Two Wide-Angle Imaging Neutral-Atom Spectrometers (TWINS) mission, a temperature map can be calculated to provide a global view of the magnetotail. These maps are combined with in situ measurements at geosynchronous orbit from GOES 13 and 15, auroral images from all sky imagers (ASIs), and ground magnetometer measurements to examine the global geospace response of a coronal mass ejection (CME) driven event on March 12th, 2012. Mesoscale features in the magnetotail are observed throughout the interval, including prior to the storm commencement and during the main phase, which has implications for the dominant processes that lead to pressure buildup in the inner magnetosphere. Auroral enhancements that can be associated with these magnetotail features through magnetosphere-ionosphere coupling are observed to appear only after global reconfigurations of the magnetic field. 

The prediction of large fluctuations in the ground magnetic field (dB/dt) is essential for preventing damage from Geomagnetically Induced Currents. Directly forecasting these fluctuations has proven difficult, but accurately determining the risk of extreme events can allow for the worst of the damage to be prevented. Here we trained Convolutional Neural Network models for eight mid‐latitude magnetometers to predict the probability thatdB/dtwill exceed the 99th percentile threshold 30–60 min in the future. Two model frameworks were compared, a model trained using solar wind data from the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) satellite, and another model trained on both ACE and SuperMAG ground magnetometer data. The models were compared to examine if the addition of current ground magnetometer data significantly improved the forecasts ofdB/dtin the future prediction window. A bootstrapping method was employed using a random split of the training and validation data to provide a measure of uncertainty in model predictions. The models were evaluated on the ground truth data during eight geomagnetic storms and a suite of evaluation metrics are presented. The models were also compared to a persistence model to ensure that the model using both datasets did not over‐rely ondB/dtvalues in making its predictions. Overall, we find that the models using both the solar wind and ground magnetometer data had better metric scores than the solar wind only and persistence models, and was able to capture more spatially localized variations in thedB/dtthreshold crossings.