Accuracy Estimation of the Modern Core Magnetic Field Models Using DMA-Methods for Recognition of the Decreased Geomagnetic Activity in Magnetic Observatory Data
A new approach to identify the signals of the Earth’s main magnetic field (core field) based on the magnetic observatory data processing is suggested. The algorithms implemented in the approach are based on the Discrete mathematical analysis (DMA). The developed method is used to analyze the data from 49 midand low-latitude observatories of the INTERMAGNET network collected in 2011–2015. The results are compared with the classical method for determining the periods of low magnetic activity of external origin which is adopted by the International Association for Geomagnetism and Aeronomy (IAGA). The advantages of the suggested new approach are demonstrated. Based on the data records for the selected time intervals, the time series of the core field components and their secular variations are obtained for each observatory. These data are compared to the values predicted by the most accurate core field models: SIFM, CHAOS-6, and EMM-2015. The accuracy of the models is estimated using a set of statistical parameters: Pearson’s coefficient of linear correlation, Spearman’s and Kendall’s coefficients of rank correlation, the mean and median values over the data sets, and the mean difference between the data obtained by the suggested method from observatory measurements and the model predictions.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bartels, J., The technique of scaling indices K and Q of geomagnetic activity, Ann. Int. Geophys. Year, 1957a, vol. 4, pp. 215–226.Google Scholar
- Bartels, J., The geomagnetic measures for the time-variations of solar corpuscular radiation, described for use in correlation studies in other geophysical fields, Ann. Int. Geophys. Year, 1957b, vol. 4, pp. 227–236.Google Scholar
- Chapman, S. and Bartels, J., Geomagnetism, vols. 1 and 2 (1940); 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1962.Google Scholar
- Finlay, C., Olsen, N., Kotsiaros, S., Gillet, N., and Toffner-Clausen, L., Recent geomagnetic secular variation from SWARM and ground observatories as estimated in CHAOS-6 geomagnetic field model, Earth Planets Space, 2016, vol. 68. https://doi.org/doi10.1186/s40623-016-0486-1.
- Gvishiani, A.D., Agayan, S.M., Bogoutdinov, Sh.R., and Soloviev, A.A., Discrete mathematical analysis and applications in geology and geophysics, Vestnik KRAUNTs. Nauki Zemle, 2010, no. 2, pp. 109–125.Google Scholar
- Gvishiani, A., Soloviev, A., Krasnoperov, R., and Lukianova, R., Automated hardware and software system for monitoring the Earth’s magnetic environment, Data Sci. J., 2016a, vol. 15. https://doi.org/doi10.5334/dsj-2016-018.
- Gvishiani, A.D., Sidorov, R.V., Lukianova, R.Yu., and Soloviev, A.A., Geomagnetic activity during St. Patrick’s Day storm inferred from global and local indicators, Russ. J. Earth Sci., 2016b, vol. 16. doi 10.2205/2016ES000593Google Scholar
- Kotsiaros, S., Finlay, C., and Olsen, N., Estimation of the magnetic field gradient tensor using the Swarm constellation, Geophys. Res. Abstr., 2014, vol. 16.Google Scholar
- Mayaud, P.N., Derivation, Meaning and use of Geomagnetic Indices, AGU Geophys. Monograph Ser., no. 22, Washington: AGU, 1980.Google Scholar
- McPherron, R.L., Indices of geomagnetic activity, in Introduction to Space Physics, Kivelson M.G. and Russell, C.T., Eds., Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 451–458.Google Scholar
- Merrill, R.T., McElhinny, M.W., and McFadden, P.L., The Magnetic Field of the Earth. Paleomagnetism, the Core, and the Deep Mantle, Int. Geophys. Ser., vol. 63, San Diego: Academic Press, 1996.Google Scholar
- Olsen, N., Luhr, H., Sabaka, T.J., Mandea, M., Rother, M., Toffner-Clausen, L., and Choi, S., CHAOS—a model of the Earth’s magnetic field derived from CHAMP, Orsted, and SAC-C magnetic satellite data, Geophys. J. Int., 2006, vol. 166, pp. 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.02959.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Olsen, N., Mandea, M., Sabaka, T.J., and Toffner-Clausen, L., The CHAOS-3 geomagnetic field model and candidates for the 11th generation IGRF, Earth, Planets Space, 2010, vol. 62, no. 1, doi 10.5047/eps.2010.07.003Google Scholar
- Olsen N., Hulot G., Lesur V., Finlay C.C., Beggan C., Chulliat A., Friis-Christensen E., Sabaka T.J., Floberghagen, R., Haagmans, R., Kotsiaros, S., Luhr, H., Toffner-Clausen, L., and Vigneron, P., The Swarm initial field model for the 2014 geomagnetic field, Geophys. Rev. Lett., 2015, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 1092–1098. doi 10.1002/ 2014GL062659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rangarajan, G.K., Indices of geomagnetic activity, in Geomagnetism, Jacobs, J.A., Ed., London: Academic Press, 1989, vol. 2, pp. 323–384.Google Scholar
- Samarskii, A.A. and Gulin, A.V., Chislennye metody: Uchebn. posobie dlya VUZov (Numerical Methods: A University Textbook), Moscow: Nauka. Gl. red. fiz-mat. lit, 1989.Google Scholar
- Soloviev, A., Agayan, S., and Bogoutdinov, S., Estimation of geomagnetic activity using measure of anomalousness, Ann. Geophys., 2016, vol. 59, no. 6, doi 10.4401/ag-7116Google Scholar
- St-Louis, B., INTERMAGNET Technical Reference Manual, Version 4.6, 2012.Google Scholar
- USA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. National Centers for Environmental Information. Enhanced Magnetic Model. www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomag/EMM.Google Scholar
- van der Waerden, B.L. Mathematische Statistik, Berlin: Springer, 1957.Google Scholar