Assessing Dst prediction models for forecasting the geoeffectiveness of ICME structures

IF 1.6 4区 物理与天体物理 Q3 ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
Shanmugha Balan, Ranadeep Sarkar, Nandita Srivastava
{"title":"Assessing Dst prediction models for forecasting the geoeffectiveness of ICME structures","authors":"Shanmugha Balan,&nbsp;Ranadeep Sarkar,&nbsp;Nandita Srivastava","doi":"10.1007/s12036-025-10082-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We compare solar wind parameters and storm conditions for two geomagnetic storms recorded during solar cycles 24 and 25 – 17 March 2013 and 23 April 2023. We select these events since they are isolated coronal mass ejection (CME) events with a two-step storm profile, which occurs because both the sheath and magnetic cloud of the CME are geoeffective. We predict the storm profile by implementing five Dst forecast models, Burton <i>et al.</i> (1975), Fenrich &amp; Luhmann (1998), O’Brien &amp; McPherron (2000), Wang <i>et al.</i> (2003), and Temerin &amp; Li (2006) – on the <i>in situ</i> observations obtained at L1. We study the SYM/H profiles in the sheath and cloud regions by comparing the actual SYM/H index recorded in the OMNI database with predictions from the models by evaluating the difference in the recorded and predicted SYM/H minima and the time difference between the storm minima. Our study demonstrates that among the five models evaluated, the Temerin &amp; Li (2006) model excels in predicting the overall storm profile and peak time of geomagnetic storms. In contrast, Fenrich &amp; Luhmann (1998) provides a more precise forecast of the intensity in the storm’s peak. In this study, we defined a new metric, CI, the ‘storm coupling integral’, by integrating a solar wind coupling function over a time interval to quantify its geoeffectiveness. In addition to indicating the geoeffectiveness, CI can be used as a tool to assess and improve the overall performance of forecast models.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":610,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy","volume":"46 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12036-025-10082-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We compare solar wind parameters and storm conditions for two geomagnetic storms recorded during solar cycles 24 and 25 – 17 March 2013 and 23 April 2023. We select these events since they are isolated coronal mass ejection (CME) events with a two-step storm profile, which occurs because both the sheath and magnetic cloud of the CME are geoeffective. We predict the storm profile by implementing five Dst forecast models, Burton et al. (1975), Fenrich & Luhmann (1998), O’Brien & McPherron (2000), Wang et al. (2003), and Temerin & Li (2006) – on the in situ observations obtained at L1. We study the SYM/H profiles in the sheath and cloud regions by comparing the actual SYM/H index recorded in the OMNI database with predictions from the models by evaluating the difference in the recorded and predicted SYM/H minima and the time difference between the storm minima. Our study demonstrates that among the five models evaluated, the Temerin & Li (2006) model excels in predicting the overall storm profile and peak time of geomagnetic storms. In contrast, Fenrich & Luhmann (1998) provides a more precise forecast of the intensity in the storm’s peak. In this study, we defined a new metric, CI, the ‘storm coupling integral’, by integrating a solar wind coupling function over a time interval to quantify its geoeffectiveness. In addition to indicating the geoeffectiveness, CI can be used as a tool to assess and improve the overall performance of forecast models.

Abstract Image

评估用于预测ICME构造地质有效性的Dst预测模型
我们比较了2013年3月24日和25日至17日和2023年4月23日太阳活动周期记录的两次地磁风暴的太阳风参数和风暴条件。我们选择这些事件是因为它们是孤立的日冕物质抛射(CME)事件,具有两步风暴剖面,其发生是因为CME的鞘层和磁云都是地球有效的。我们通过实施5种Dst预测模式来预测风暴剖面,Burton等人(1975)、Fenrich等人(1998)、O 'Brien等人(2000)、Wang等人(2003)和Temerin等人(2006)——基于在L1获得的现场观测数据。通过比较OMNI数据库中实际记录的SYM/H指数与模型预测的SYM/H值的差异,以及风暴极小值之间的时间差,研究了鞘区和云区的SYM/H分布。我们的研究表明,在评估的五个模型中,Temerin & Li(2006)模型在预测整体风暴廓线和地磁风暴峰值时间方面表现出色。与此相反,frich & Luhmann(1998)对风暴峰值的强度提供了更精确的预测。在这项研究中,我们定义了一个新的度量,CI,即“风暴耦合积分”,通过在一段时间间隔内对太阳风耦合函数进行积分来量化其地球有效性。除了表明地质有效性外,CI还可以作为评估和改进预测模型整体性能的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy
Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy 地学天文-天文与天体物理
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
84
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes original research papers on all aspects of astrophysics and astronomy, including instrumentation, laboratory astrophysics, and cosmology. Critical reviews of topical fields are also published. Articles submitted as letters will be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信