A statistical comparison of interplanetary shock and CME propagation models

Cho, K.-S.; Moon, Yong‐Jae; Dryer, M.; Fry, C. D.; Park, Y.-D.; Kim, Kyoung-Sook

doi:10.1029/2003ja010029

Cited by 50 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 41 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are several promising computer codes under development, with very encouraging results (e.g. Riley et al, 2001;Linker et al, 2003;Mozer and Briggs, 2003;Cho et al, 2003;Fry et al, 2003;Manchester et al, 2004;Odstrcil et al, 2004;Riley and Crooker, 2004). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The association of coronal mass ejections with their effects near the Earth

Schwenn¹,

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. To this day, the prediction of space weather effects near the Earth suffers from a fundamental problem: The radial propagation speed of "halo" CMEs (i.e. CMEs pointed along the Sun-Earth-line that are known to be the main drivers of space weather disturbances) towards the Earth cannot be measured directly because of the unfavorable geometry. From inspecting many limb CMEs observed by the LASCO coronagraphs on SOHO we found that there is usually a good correlation between the radial speed and the lateral expansion speed V exp of CME clouds. This latter quantity can also be determined for earthward-pointed halo CMEs. Thus, V exp may serve as a proxy for the otherwise inaccessible radial speed of halo CMEs. We studied this connection using data from both ends: solar data and interplanetary data obtained near the Earth, for a period from January 1997 to 15 April 2001. The data were primarily provided by the LASCO coronagraphs, plus additional information from the EIT instrument on SOHO. Solar wind data from the plasma instruments on the SOHO, ACE and Wind spacecraft were used to identify the arrivals of ICME signatures. Here, we use "ICME" as a generic term for all CME effects in interplanetary space, thus comprising not only ejecta themselves but also shocks as well. Among 181 front side or limb full or partial halo CMEs recorded by LASCO, on the one hand, and 187 ICME events registered near the Earth, on the other hand, we found 91 cases where CMEs were uniquely associated with ICME signatures in front of the Earth. Eighty ICMEs were associated with a shock, and for 75 of them both the halo expansion speed V exp and the travel time T tr of the shock could be determined. The function T tr =203-20.77* ln (V exp ) fits the data best. This empirical formula can be used for predicting further ICME arrivals, with a 95% error margin of about one day. Note, though, that in 15% of comparable cases, a full or partial halo CME does not cause any ICME signature at Earth at all; every fourth partial halo CME and every sixth limb halo CME does not hit the Earth (false Correspondence to: R. Schwenn (schwenn@linmpi.mpg.de) alarms). Furthermore, every fifth transient shock or ICME or isolated geomagnetic storm is not caused by an identifiable partial or full halo CME on the front side (missing alarms).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The association of coronal mass ejections with their effects near the Earth

Schwenn¹,

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is very meaningful in that it can give us about 2-3 days of advance notice to prepare for geomagnetic storms. Other studies, still in very early stages [Dryer, 1998], use physics-based models that employ observations of flares or CME occurrences and coronal shock-induced metric radio frequency drifts [Cho et al, 2003;Fry et al, 2003;Odstrcil, 2003;Dryer et al, 2004;McKenna-Lawlor et al, 2006] to predict CME or their shocks' arrivals at Earth. These studies use such observations (such as CME cone shapes and ad hoc overpressure or momentum pulses) to mimic the basically unknown physical processes in the originating form of solar activity.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical model for prediction of geomagnetic storms using initially observed CME parameters at the Sun

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] In this study, we discuss the general behaviors of geomagnetic storm strength associated with observed parameters of coronal mass ejection (CME) such as speed (V) and earthward direction (D) of CMEs as well as the longitude (L) and magnetic field orientation (M) of overlaying potential fields of the CME source region, and we develop an empirical model to predict geomagnetic storm occurrence with its strength (gauged by the Dst index) in terms of these CME parameters. For this we select 66 halo or partial halo CMEs associated with M-class and X-class solar flares, which have clearly identifiable source regions, from 1997 to 2003. After examining how each of these CME parameters correlates with the geoeffectiveness of the CMEs, we find several properties as follows: (1) Parameter D best correlates with storm strength Dst; (2) the majority of geoeffective CMEs have been originated from solar longitude 15°W, and CMEs originated away from this longitude tend to produce weaker storms; (3) correlations between Dst and the CME parameters improve if CMEs are separated into two groups depending on whether their magnetic fields are oriented southward or northward in their source regions. Based on these observations, we present two empirical expressions for Dst in terms of L, V, and D for two groups of CMEs, respectively. This is a new attempt to predict not only the occurrence of geomagnetic storms, but also the storm strength (Dst) solely based on the CME parameters.

show abstract

“…Gopalswamy et al (2001a); Schwenn et al (2001); Wang et al (2002); Cho et al (2003) have derived more complicated relationships between the travel time and the initial CME velocity. Regarding location of the source, Wang et al (2002) and Zhang et al (2003) found that CMEs responsible for major geomagnetic storms come mostly from the western hemisphere and within a latitude strip of ±30 • around the equator.…”

Section: Predicting Icmesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As recalled by Jacobs et al (2005), the frequency drift of the resulting type II radio emissions is related to the dynamics of the shock and the related CME, as the density of the ambient solar wind drops with increasing distance from the Sun. However, the relationship between metric to kilometric type II bursts and CME-produced shocks is not strict (Claßen and Aurass, 2002;Wen and Wang, 2004). Type II events are often accompanied by a parallel burst at the first harmonic (approximately double the frequency) of the main burst.…”

Section: Coronal Mass Ejections (Cmes)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Solar weather monitoring

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Space Weather nowcasting and forecasting require solar observations because geoeffective disturbances can arise from three types of solar phenomena: coronal mass ejections (CMEs), flares and coronal holes. For each, we discuss their definition and review their precursors in terms of remote sensing and in-situ observations. The objectives of Space Weather require some specific instrumental features, which we list using the experience gained from the daily operations of the Solar Influences Data analysis Centre (SIDC) at the Royal Observatory of Belgium. Nowcasting requires real-time monitoring to assess quickly and reliably the severity of any potentially geoeffective solar event. Both research and forecasting could incorporate more observations in order to feed case studies and data assimilation respectively. Numerical models will result in better predictions of geomagnetic storms and solar energetic particle (SEP) events. We review the data types available to monitor solar activity and interplanetary conditions. They come from space missions and ground observatories and range from sequences of dopplergrams, magnetograms, white-light, chromospheric, coronal, coronagraphic and radio images, to irradiance and in-situ time-series. Their role is summarized together with indications about current and future solar monitoring instruments.

show abstract

A statistical comparison of interplanetary shock and CME propagation models

Cited by 50 publications

References 41 publications

The association of coronal mass ejections with their effects near the Earth

The association of coronal mass ejections with their effects near the Earth

An empirical model for prediction of geomagnetic storms using initially observed CME parameters at the Sun

Solar weather monitoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About