2016
DOI: 10.1103/physrevd.93.043016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A predictive analytic model for the solar modulation of cosmic rays

Abstract: An important factor limiting our ability to understand the production and propagation of cosmic rays pertains to the effects of heliospheric forces, commonly known as solar modulation. The solar wind is capable of generating time and charge-dependent effects on the spectrum and intensity of low energy ( < ∼ 10 GeV) cosmic rays reaching Earth. Previous analytic treatments of solar modulation have utilized the force-field approximation, in which a simple potential is adopted whose amplitude is selected to best f… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
138
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 107 publications
(141 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
2
138
0
Order By: Relevance
“…During the completion of this work, we became aware of related studies by Ghelfi et al (2016) and by Cholis et al (2016). The data sets and methods used differ from those of our study, making the three analyses complementary.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the completion of this work, we became aware of related studies by Ghelfi et al (2016) and by Cholis et al (2016). The data sets and methods used differ from those of our study, making the three analyses complementary.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(ii) We employ high-energy losses by taking a conservative choice for magnetic fields, of B ⊙ ¼ 8.9 μG at the Sun. (iii) We take the largest value of the solar modulation potential, Φ ¼ 0.6 GV, measured for AMS during its data-taking period [95]. In Fig.…”
Section: B Quantifying "Conservative"mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The largest measured value of the solar modulation potential during AMS's data taking period of Φ ¼ 0.6 GV is taken [95], and we employ the force-field approximation, which is valid for positron fluxes [95,96]. …”
Section: A Cosmic-ray Propagationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These differences will be displayed respectively as proton and electron time profiles, from 2006 to 2009, together with the e − /p ratio as a function of rigidity for the mentioned period. Evidently, with the observation of precise spectra for protons, electrons, positrons and even anti-protons, on an almost continuous time-scale, charge-sign dependent modulation, and other important 3D effects, should no longer be ignored when interpreting these data, so that surpassing the force-field model has become necessary; see also Maccione (2013); Cholis et al (2016).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%