2023 年 2 月至 4 月的地球同步磁极穿越情况

IF 0.6 4区 物理与天体物理 Q4 ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
A. V. Dmitriev
{"title":"2023 年 2 月至 4 月的地球同步磁极穿越情况","authors":"A. V. Dmitriev","doi":"10.1134/s001095252360035x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Abstract</h3><p>Geosynchronous magnetopause crossings (GMCs) were analyzed during geomagnetic storms on February 26, March 23, and April 23, 2023. GMC-associated magnetosheath intervals were identified using magnetic data acquired from the <i>GOES-16</i> and <i>GOES-17</i> spacecraft. A comparative analysis of various magnetopause models was performed on the base of solar wind conditions measured by the <i>THEMIS-E</i> spacecraft and the <i>Wind</i> interplanetary monitor. The analysis of models was based on statistical parameters for determining magnetosheath intervals. It was shown that for all three storms, the model presented in [1] demonstrated the best accuracy. For events of moderate magnetic storms against the background of small negative <i>Bz</i> component of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), good results are obtained with the model described in [2]. For extreme events with very high solar wind pressures and/or very strong negative IMF <i>Bz</i>, the model shown in [3] exhibits good accuracy, and satisfactory accuracy is also demonstrated by models presented in [4, 5]. It was shown that the accuracy of the models was affected by the following factors and effects: the choice of interplanetary monitor, the dependence of the model on the solar wind pressure, the <i>Bz</i> saturation effect, the dawn–dusk magnetopause asymmetry, and the effect of prehistory.</p>","PeriodicalId":56319,"journal":{"name":"Cosmic Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Geosynchronous Magnetopause Crossings in February–April 2023\",\"authors\":\"A. V. Dmitriev\",\"doi\":\"10.1134/s001095252360035x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Abstract</h3><p>Geosynchronous magnetopause crossings (GMCs) were analyzed during geomagnetic storms on February 26, March 23, and April 23, 2023. GMC-associated magnetosheath intervals were identified using magnetic data acquired from the <i>GOES-16</i> and <i>GOES-17</i> spacecraft. A comparative analysis of various magnetopause models was performed on the base of solar wind conditions measured by the <i>THEMIS-E</i> spacecraft and the <i>Wind</i> interplanetary monitor. The analysis of models was based on statistical parameters for determining magnetosheath intervals. It was shown that for all three storms, the model presented in [1] demonstrated the best accuracy. For events of moderate magnetic storms against the background of small negative <i>Bz</i> component of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), good results are obtained with the model described in [2]. For extreme events with very high solar wind pressures and/or very strong negative IMF <i>Bz</i>, the model shown in [3] exhibits good accuracy, and satisfactory accuracy is also demonstrated by models presented in [4, 5]. It was shown that the accuracy of the models was affected by the following factors and effects: the choice of interplanetary monitor, the dependence of the model on the solar wind pressure, the <i>Bz</i> saturation effect, the dawn–dusk magnetopause asymmetry, and the effect of prehistory.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cosmic Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cosmic Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"101\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1134/s001095252360035x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"物理与天体物理\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cosmic Research","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1134/s001095252360035x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 在 2023 年 2 月 26 日、3 月 23 日和 4 月 23 日的地磁暴期间对地球同步磁极交叉(GMC)进行了分析。利用 GOES-16 和 GOES-17 航天器获取的磁数据,确定了与 GMC 相关的磁鞘区间。根据 THEMIS-E 航天器和风行星际监测器测量到的太阳风条件,对各种磁层顶模型进行了比较分析。对模型的分析是以确定磁层间距的统计参数为基础的。结果表明,对于所有三次风暴,[1]中提出的模型都显示出最佳精确度。对于以行星际磁场(IMF)的小负 Bz 分量为背景的中等磁暴事件,[2] 中描述的模型获得了良好的结果。对于太阳风压力非常大和/或行星际磁场(IMF)Bz 负分量非常强的极端事件,[3]中的模型显示出良好的精度,[4, 5]中的模型也显示出令人满意的精度。研究表明,模型的准确性受到以下因素和效应的影响:行星际监测器的选择、模型对太阳风压的依赖、Bz 饱和效应、黎明-黄昏磁极不对称以及史前效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Geosynchronous Magnetopause Crossings in February–April 2023

Geosynchronous Magnetopause Crossings in February–April 2023

Abstract

Geosynchronous magnetopause crossings (GMCs) were analyzed during geomagnetic storms on February 26, March 23, and April 23, 2023. GMC-associated magnetosheath intervals were identified using magnetic data acquired from the GOES-16 and GOES-17 spacecraft. A comparative analysis of various magnetopause models was performed on the base of solar wind conditions measured by the THEMIS-E spacecraft and the Wind interplanetary monitor. The analysis of models was based on statistical parameters for determining magnetosheath intervals. It was shown that for all three storms, the model presented in [1] demonstrated the best accuracy. For events of moderate magnetic storms against the background of small negative Bz component of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), good results are obtained with the model described in [2]. For extreme events with very high solar wind pressures and/or very strong negative IMF Bz, the model shown in [3] exhibits good accuracy, and satisfactory accuracy is also demonstrated by models presented in [4, 5]. It was shown that the accuracy of the models was affected by the following factors and effects: the choice of interplanetary monitor, the dependence of the model on the solar wind pressure, the Bz saturation effect, the dawn–dusk magnetopause asymmetry, and the effect of prehistory.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cosmic Research
Cosmic Research 地学天文-工程:宇航
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
33.30%
发文量
41
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cosmic Research publishes scientific papers covering all subjects of space science and technology, including the following: ballistics, flight dynamics of the Earth’s artificial satellites and automatic interplanetary stations; problems of transatmospheric descent; design and structure of spacecraft and scientific research instrumentation; life support systems and radiation safety of manned spacecrafts; exploration of the Earth from Space; exploration of near space; exploration of the Sun, planets, secondary planets, and interplanetary medium; exploration of stars, nebulae, interstellar medium, galaxies, and quasars from spacecraft; and various astrophysical problems related to space exploration. A chronicle of scientific events and other notices concerning the main topics of the journal are also presented.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信