Assessment of Current Capabilities in Modeling the Ionospheric Climatology for Space Weather Applications: foF2 and hmF2

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F68378289%3A_____%2F18%3A00499979" target="_blank" >RIV/68378289:_____/18:00499979 - isvavai.cz</a>

Result on the web

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002035" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002035</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002035" target="_blank" >10.1029/2018SW002035</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Assessment of Current Capabilities in Modeling the Ionospheric Climatology for Space Weather Applications: foF2 and hmF2

Original language description

This paper presents preliminary results of a metrics‐based assessment of current modeling capabilities in predicting the ionospheric climatology for two ionospheric characteristics, the foF2 and hmF2. This work is part of the activities of the Ionosphere Working Group of the International Forum for Space Weather Modeling Capabilities Assessment that is facilitated by the Community Coordinated Modeling Center. The results are based on the comparison between modeled and observed monthly medians of the foF2 and hmF2. Modeling formulations considered here include two empirical models (the International Reference Ionosphere [IRI] and Massachusetts Institute of Technology [MIT] Empirical model), as well as two physics‐based, coupled ionosphere‐thermosphere models (the Coupled Thermosphere Ionosphere Plasmasphere Electrodynamics [CTIPe] and Thermosphere‐Ionosphere‐Electrodynamics General Circulation Model [TIE‐GCM]). The comparisons were carried out in year 2012 over seven ionospheric locations distributed worldwide in the Northern Hemisphere. Based on our findings, although significant errors are occasionally obtained from all modeling approaches, empirical models tend to provide systematically better correlation with the observed medians and follow the observed distributions more successfully, offering smaller prediction errors than the physics‐based ones. In case of foF2, the averaged prediction accuracy in terms of root‐mean‐square error (RMSE) ranges around 1.5 MHz for physics‐based models and 0.5 MHz for empirical models. In case of hmF2, it ranges around 30 and 20 km, respectively. The prediction accuracy presents strong seasonal and local time dependence, which differs for different models and ionospheric characteristics (i.e., foF2 or hmF2): it is strong for physics‐based models, weaker for IRI, and very weak for MIT empirical model. This latter outcome may provide suggestive input for future improvements.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

10509 - Meteorology and atmospheric sciences

Project

—

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2018

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Space Weather

ISSN

1542-7390

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

16

Issue of the periodical within the volume

12

Country of publishing house

US - UNITED STATES

Number of pages

16

Pages from-to

1930-1945

UT code for WoS article

000455442300004

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85057750406