Comparison of Dst forecast models and their dependence on interplanetary structure

Details Comparison of Dst forecast models and their dependence on interplanetary structure Comparison of Dst forecast models and their dependence on interplanetary structure

Dec 2010

adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2010agufmsm51a1741j&link_type=abstract

American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2010, abstract #SM51A-1741

Physics

[2722] Magnetospheric Physics / Forecasting, [2788] Magnetospheric Physics / Magnetic Storms And Substorms

Scientific paper

We have investigated 63 intense geomagnetic storms (Dst ≤ -100 nT) that occurred from 1998 to 2006. Using these events, we compared Dst forecast models: Burton et al. (1975), Fenrich and Luhmann (1998), O’Brien and McPherron (2000a), Wang et al. (2003), and Temerin and Li (2002, 2006) models. For comparison, we examined a linear correlation coefficient, RMS error, the difference of Dst minimum value (△peak), and the difference of Dst minimum time (△peak_time) between the observed and the predicted during geomagnetic storm period. As a result, we found that Temerin and Li model is mostly much better than other models. The model produces a linear correlation coefficient of 0.94, a RMS (Root Mean Square) error of 14.89 nT, a MAD (Mean Absolute Deviation) of △peak of 12.54 nT, and a MAD of △peak_time of 1.44 hour. Also, we classified storm events as five groups according to their interplanetary origin structures: 17 sMC events (IP shock and MC), 18 SH events (sheath field), 10 SH+MC events (Sheath field and MC), 8 CIR events, and 10 nonMC events (non-MC type ICME). We found that Temerin and Li model is also best for all structures. The RMS error and MAD of △peak of their model depend on their associated interplanetary structures like; 19.1 nT and 16.7 nT for sMC, 12.5 nT and 7.8 nT for SH, 17.6 nT and 15.8 nT for SH+MC, 11.8 nT and 8.6 nT for CIR, and 11.9 nT and 10.5 nT for nonMC. One interesting thing is that MC-associated storms produce larger errors than the other-associated ones. Especially, the values of RMS error and MAD of △peak of SH structure of Temerin and Li model are very lower than those of other models.

Affiliated with

Also associated with

No associations

Rating

Comparison of Dst forecast models and their dependence on interplanetary structure does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with Comparison of Dst forecast models and their dependence on interplanetary structure, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Comparison of Dst forecast models and their dependence on interplanetary structure will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1473269