Validating the Space Weather Modeling Framework (SWMF) for applications in northern Europe - Ground magnetic perturbation validation | Journal of Space Weather and Space Climate

Topical Issue - Geomagnetic Storms and Substorms: a Geomagnetically Induced Current perspective

Open Access

Issue		J. Space Weather Space Clim. Volume 10, 2020 Topical Issue - Geomagnetic Storms and Substorms: a Geomagnetically Induced Current perspective


Article Number		33
Number of page(s)		13
DOI		https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2020034
Published online		28 July 2020

Boteler DH, Pirjola RJ, Nevanlinna H. 1998. The effects of geomagnetic disturbances on electrical systems at the Earth’s surface. Adv Space Res 22(1): 17–27. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
De Zeeuw DL, Gombosi TI, Groth CPT, Powell KG, Stout QF. 2000. An adaptive MHD method for global space weather simulations. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 28(6): 1956–1965. https://doi.org/10.1109/27.902224. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
De Zeeuw DL, Sazykin S, Wolf RA, Gombosi TI, Ridley AJ, Tóth G. 2004. Coupling of a global MHD code and an inner magnetospheric model: Initial results. J Geophys Res Space Phys 109(A12): A12219. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JA010366. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Haiducek JD, Welling DT, Ganushkina NY, Morley SK, Ozturk DS. 2017. SWMF global magnetosphere simulations of January 2005: Geomagnetic indices and cross-polar cap potential. Space Weather 15(12): 1567–1587. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017SW001695. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Koren B. 1993. A robust upwind discretization method for advection, diffusion and source terms. In: Numerical methods for advection-diffusion problems, Vreugdenhil CB, Koren B (Eds.), Notes on numerical fluid mechanics, 45, Vieweg, Germany, pp. 117–138. [Google Scholar]
Morley SK, Welling DT, Koller J, Larsen BA, Henderson MG, Niehof JT. 2011. Spacepy – A Python-based library of tools forthe space science. In: Proc. 9th Python in Science Conference (SciPy 2010), pp. 39–45. [Google Scholar]
Morley SK, Welling DT, Woodroffe JR. 2018. Perturbed input ensemble modeling with the space weather modeling framework. Space Weather 16(9): 1330–1347. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002000. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Pirjola R. 2005. Effects of space weather on high-latitude ground systems. Adv Space Res 36: 2231–2240. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Powell KG, Roe PL, Linde TJ, Gombosi TI, Zeeuw DLD. 1999. A solution-adaptive upwind scheme for ideal magnetohydrodynamics. J Comput Phys 154(2): 284–309. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1999.6299. [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Pulkkinen A, Viljanen A, Pirjola R. 2006. Estimation of geomagnetically induced current levels from different input data. Space Weather 4(8): S08005. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006SW000229. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Pulkkinen A, Rasttter L, Kuznetsova M, Hesse M, Ridley A, Raeder J, Singer HJ, Chulaki A. 2010. Systematic evaluation of ground and geostationary magnetic field predictions generated by global magnetohydrodynamic models. J Geophys Res Space Phys 115(A3): A03206. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JA014537. [Google Scholar]
Pulkkinen A, Kuznetsova M, Ridley A, Raeder J, Vapirev A, et al. 2011. Geospace environment modeling 2008–2009 challenge: Ground magnetic field perturbations. Space Weather 9(2): S02004. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010SW000600. [Google Scholar]
Pulkkinen A, Rasttter L, Kuznetsova M, Singer H, Balch C, et al. 2013. Community-wide validation of geospace model ground magnetic field perturbation predictions to support model transition to operations. Space Weather 11(6): 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/swe.20056. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Rastätter L, Kuznetsova MM, Vapirev A, Ridley A, Wiltberger M, Pulkkinen A, Hesse M, Singer HJ. 2011. Geospace Environment Modeling 2008–2009 Challenge: Geosynchronous magnetic field. Space Weather 9(4): S04005. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010SW000617. [Google Scholar]
Rastätter L, Kuznetsova MM, Glocer A, Welling D, Meng X, et al. 2013. Geospace environment modeling 2008–2009 challenge: Dst index. Space Weather 11(4): 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1002/swe.20036. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Reay SJ, Allen W, Baillie O, Bowe J, Clarke E, Lesur V, Macmillan S. 2005. Space weather effects on drilling accuracy in the North Sea. Ann Geophys 23(9): 3081–3088. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-23-3081-2005. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Ridley AJ, Gombosi TI, DeZeeuw DL. 2004. Ionospheric control of the magnetosphere: Conductance. Ann Geophys 22(2): 567–584. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-22-567-2004. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Sazykin S, Wolf RA, Spiro RW, Gombosi TI, De Zeeuw DL, Thomsen MF. 2002. Interchange instability in the inner magnetosphere associated with geosynchronous particle flux decreases. Geophys Res Lett 29(10): 88–1–88–4. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL014416. [Google Scholar]
Schield MA, Freeman JW, Dessler AJ. 1969. A source for field-aligned currents at auroral latitudes. J Geophys Res (1896–1977) 74(1): 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1029/JA074i001p00247. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Sokolov IV, Timofeev EV, Sakai J-I, Takayama K. 2002. Artificial wind – A new framework to construct simple and efficient upwind shock-capturing schemes. J Comput Phys 181(1): 354–393. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2002.7130. [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Thébault E, Finlay C, Beggan C, Alken P, Aubert J, et al. 2015. International Geomagnetic Reference Field: The 12th generation. Earth Planet Space 67: 79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-015-0228-9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Toffoletto F, Sazykin S, Spiro R, Wolf R. 2003. Inner magnetospheric modeling with the Rice Convection Model. Space Sci Rev 107(1): 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025532008047. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Tóth G, Sokolov IV, Gombosi TI, Chesney DR, Clauer CR, et al. 2005. Space Weather Modeling Framework: A new tool for the space science community. J Geophys Res Space Phys 110(A12): A12226. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JA011126. [Google Scholar]
Tóth G, Holst BVD, Sokolov IV, De Zeeuw DL, Gombosi TI, et al. 2012. Adaptive numerical algorithms in space weather modeling. J Comput Phys 231(3): 870–903. Special Issue: Computational Plasma Physics, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2011.02.006. [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Viljanen A, Nevanlinna H, Pajunpää K, Pulkkinen A. 2001. Time derivative of the horizontal geomagnetic field as an activity indicator. Ann Geophys 19(9): 1107–1118. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-19-1107-2001. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Viljanen A, Pulkkinen A, Amm O, Pirjola R, Korja T, Group BW. 2004. Fast computation of the geoelectric field using the method of elementary current systems and planar Earth models. Ann Geophys 22(1): 101–113. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-22-101-2004. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Welling DT, Ridley AJ. 2010. Validation of SWMF magnetic field and plasma. Space Weather 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1029/2009SW000494. [Google Scholar]
Welling DT, Anderson BJ, Crowley G, Pulkkinen AA, Rasttter L. 2017. Exploring predictive performance: A reanalysis of the geospace model transition challenge. Space Weather 15(1): 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016SW001505. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Welling DT, Ngwira CM, Opgenoorth H, Haiducek JD, Savani NP, et al. 2018. Recommendations for next-generation ground magnetic perturbation validation. Space Weather 16(12): 1912–1920. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002064. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Wolf RA, Harel M, Spiro RW, Voigt G-H, Reiff PH, Chen C-K. 1982. Computer simulation of inner magnetospheric dynamics for the magnetic storm of July 29, 1977. J Geophys Res Space Phys 87(A8): 5949–5962. https://doi.org/10.1029/JA087iA08p05949. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
Yu Y, Ridley AJ. 2008. Validation of the space weather modeling framework using ground-based magnetometers. Space Weather 6(5): S05002. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007SW000345. [Google Scholar]
Yu Y, Ridley AJ, Welling DT, Tόth G. 2010. Including gap region field-aligned currents and magnetospheric currents in the MHD calculation of ground-based magnetic field perturbations. J Geophys Res Space Phys 115(A8): A08207. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JA014869. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.