Validation of Ionospheric Specifications During Geomagnetic Storms: TEC and foF2 During the 2013 March Storm Event
Shim, J. S.; Tsagouri, I.; Goncharenko, L.; Rastaetter, L.; Kuznetsova, M.; Bilitza, D.; Codrescu, M.; Coster, A. J.; Solomon, S. C.; Fedrizzi, M.; Förster, M.; Fuller‐rowell, T. J.; Gardner, L. C.; Huba, J.; Namgaladze, A. A.; Prokhorov, B. E.; Ridley, A. J.; Scherliess, L.; Schunk, R. W.; Sojka, J. J.; Zhu, L.
2018-11
View/ Open
Citation
Shim, J. S.; Tsagouri, I.; Goncharenko, L.; Rastaetter, L.; Kuznetsova, M.; Bilitza, D.; Codrescu, M.; Coster, A. J.; Solomon, S. C.; Fedrizzi, M.; Förster, M. ; Fuller‐rowell, T. J. ; Gardner, L. C.; Huba, J.; Namgaladze, A. A.; Prokhorov, B. E.; Ridley, A. J.; Scherliess, L.; Schunk, R. W.; Sojka, J. J.; Zhu, L. (2018). "Validation of Ionospheric Specifications During Geomagnetic Storms: TEC and foF2 During the 2013 March Storm Event." Space Weather 16(11): 1686-1701.
Abstract
To address challenges of assessing space weather modeling capabilities, the Community Coordinated Modeling Center is leading a newly established International Forum for Space Weather Modeling Capabilities Assessment. This paper presents preliminary results of validation of modeled foF2 (F2 layer critical frequency) and TEC (total electron content) during the first selected 2013 March storm event (17 March 2013). In this study, we used eight ionospheric models ranging from empirical to physicsâ based, coupled ionosphereâ thermosphere and data assimilation models. The quantities we considered are TEC and foF2 changes and percentage changes compared to quiet time background, and the maximum and minimum percentage changes. In addition, we considered normalized percentage changes of TEC. We compared the modeled quantities with groundâ based observations of vertical Global Navigation Satellite System TEC (provided by Massachusetts Institute of Technology Haystack Observatory) and foF2 data (provided by Global Ionospheric Radio Observatory) at the 12 locations selected in middle latitudes of the American and Europeanâ African longitude sectors. To quantitatively evaluate the models’ performance, we calculated skill scores including correlation coefficient, rootâ mean square error (RMSE), ratio of the modeled to observed maximum percentage changes (yield), and timing error. Our study indicates that average RMSEs of foF2 range from about 1Â MHz to 1.5Â MHz. The average RMSEs of TEC are between ~5 and ~10 TECU (1 TEC Unit =Â 1016Â el/m2). dfoF2[%] RMSEs are between 15% and 25%, which is smaller than RMSE of dTEC[%] ranging from 30% to 60%. The performance of the models varies with the location and metrics considered.Key PointsfoF2/TEC and foF2/TEC changes during a storm predicted by eight ionosphere models were compared with GIRO foF2 and GPS TEC measurementsSkill scores (e.g., correlation coefficient, RMSE, yield, and timing error) were calculatedModel performance strongly depends on the quantities considered, the type of metrics used, and the location consideredPublisher
Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Utah State University.
ISSN
1542-7390 1542-7390
Other DOIs
Types
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.