A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observations
Monthly median empirical models IRI-95 and NeUoG were compared with incoherent scatter EISCAT and Millstone Hill observations as well as with El Arenosillo Digisonde N e (h) bottomside profiles. A comparison was made for various seasons, levels of solar activity, daytime and night-time hours. The re...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV)
2000-06-01
|
| Series: | Annals of Geophysics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.annalsofgeophysics.eu/index.php/annals/article/view/3621 |
| _version_ | 1819260437521235968 |
|---|---|
| author | V. K. Depuev G. Miro T. Y. Leschinskaya A. V. Mikhailov |
| author_facet | V. K. Depuev G. Miro T. Y. Leschinskaya A. V. Mikhailov |
| author_sort | V. K. Depuev |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Monthly median empirical models IRI-95 and NeUoG were compared with incoherent scatter EISCAT and Millstone Hill observations as well as with El Arenosillo Digisonde N e (h) bottomside profiles. A comparison was made for various seasons, levels of solar activity, daytime and night-time hours. The results on the topside comparison: 1) the IRI-95 model systematically and strongly overestimates the Ne (h) effective scale height both for daytime and night-time periods especially during maximum and middle solar activity both at EISCAT and Millstone Hill; 2) the NeUoG model on the contrary systematically underestimates the scale height at all levels of solar activity. But the NeUoG model provides much better overall agreement with SD being less by a factor of 1.5-1.7 in comparison with the IRI-95 model results. The results on the bottom-side comparison: 1) the IRI-95 accuracy is different for daytime and night-time hours, being much worse for the night-time; 2) the NeUoG model similar to IRI-95 demonstrates much worse accuracy for the night-time hours; 3) the NeUoG model demonstrates no advantages over the IRI-95 model in the bottomside N e (h) description. A new simple TopN e model for the N e (h) topside distribution based on the EISCAT and Millstone Hill observations is proposed. The model is supposed to be normalized by the observed hmF 2 and NmF 2 values and is valid below a 600 km height. The TopN e model provides good approximation accuracy over EISCAT and Millstone Hill observations. A comparison with the independent Intercosmos-19 topside sounder observations is given. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-23T19:25:54Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-3ae536112404479496ad6cd194d2da30 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1593-5213 2037-416X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-23T19:25:54Z |
| publishDate | 2000-06-01 |
| publisher | Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Annals of Geophysics |
| spelling | doaj.art-3ae536112404479496ad6cd194d2da302022-12-21T17:34:02ZengIstituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV)Annals of Geophysics1593-52132037-416X2000-06-0143110.4401/ag-3621A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observationsV. K. DepuevG. MiroT. Y. LeschinskayaA. V. MikhailovMonthly median empirical models IRI-95 and NeUoG were compared with incoherent scatter EISCAT and Millstone Hill observations as well as with El Arenosillo Digisonde N e (h) bottomside profiles. A comparison was made for various seasons, levels of solar activity, daytime and night-time hours. The results on the topside comparison: 1) the IRI-95 model systematically and strongly overestimates the Ne (h) effective scale height both for daytime and night-time periods especially during maximum and middle solar activity both at EISCAT and Millstone Hill; 2) the NeUoG model on the contrary systematically underestimates the scale height at all levels of solar activity. But the NeUoG model provides much better overall agreement with SD being less by a factor of 1.5-1.7 in comparison with the IRI-95 model results. The results on the bottom-side comparison: 1) the IRI-95 accuracy is different for daytime and night-time hours, being much worse for the night-time; 2) the NeUoG model similar to IRI-95 demonstrates much worse accuracy for the night-time hours; 3) the NeUoG model demonstrates no advantages over the IRI-95 model in the bottomside N e (h) description. A new simple TopN e model for the N e (h) topside distribution based on the EISCAT and Millstone Hill observations is proposed. The model is supposed to be normalized by the observed hmF 2 and NmF 2 values and is valid below a 600 km height. The TopN e model provides good approximation accuracy over EISCAT and Millstone Hill observations. A comparison with the independent Intercosmos-19 topside sounder observations is given.http://www.annalsofgeophysics.eu/index.php/annals/article/view/3621empirical Ne (h) modelsincoherent scatterdigisondetopside sounder observations |
| spellingShingle | V. K. Depuev G. Miro T. Y. Leschinskaya A. V. Mikhailov A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observations Annals of Geophysics empirical Ne (h) models incoherent scatter digisonde topside sounder observations |
| title | A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observations |
| title_full | A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observations |
| title_fullStr | A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observations |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observations |
| title_short | A comparison of Ne (h) model profiles with ground-based and topside sounder observations |
| title_sort | comparison of ne h model profiles with ground based and topside sounder observations |
| topic | empirical Ne (h) models incoherent scatter digisonde topside sounder observations |
| url | http://www.annalsofgeophysics.eu/index.php/annals/article/view/3621 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT vkdepuev acomparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations AT gmiro acomparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations AT tyleschinskaya acomparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations AT avmikhailov acomparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations AT vkdepuev comparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations AT gmiro comparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations AT tyleschinskaya comparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations AT avmikhailov comparisonofnehmodelprofileswithgroundbasedandtopsidesounderobservations |