On the use of NeQuick topside option in IRI-2007

The latest version of IRI includes various options for the computation of the topside electron density profile. One of the possible choices is based on NeQuick model. Its inclusion in IRI has been made transferring all the formulations used in NeQuick model. In details, an Epstein layer function is used to describe the electron density profile and the topside shape is controlled by an empirical parameter, connected to the NeQuick F2 bottomside thickness parameter, B2bot. It is computed also in this IRI topside option in order to maintain self-consistency with its original formulation. This paper analyses the possibility of using the IRI bottomside parameters for this option and its impact on the profile and TEC. The case of experimental peak values given as input is also analysed.     

Modelling bottom and topside electron density and TEC with profile data from topside ionograms

The paper describes the technique that has been implemented to model the electron density distribution above and below the F2 peak making use of only the profiles obtained from the INTERCOSMOS-19 topside ionograms. Each single profile from the satellite height to the ionosphere peak has been fitted by a semi-Epstein layer function of the type used in the DGR model with shape factor variable with altitude. The topside above the satellite height has been extrapolated to match given values of plasmaspheric electron densities to obtain the full topside profile. The bottomside electron density has been calculated by using the maximum electron density and its altitude estimated from the topside ionogram as input for a modified version of the DGR derived profiler that uses model values for the foF1 and foE layers of the ionosphere. Total electron content has also been calculated. Longitudinal cross sections of vertical profiles from latitudes 50° N to 50° S latitude are shown for low and high geomagnetic activity. These cross sections indicate the equatorial anomaly effect and the changes of the shape of low latitude topside ionosphere during geomagnetic active periods. These results and the potentiality of the technique are discussed.     

A topside investigation over a mid-latitude digisonde station in Cyprus

We examine the systematic differences between topside electron density measurements recorded by different techniques over the low-middle latitude operating European station in Nicosia, Cyprus (geographical coordinates: 35.14^oN, 33.2^oE), (magnetic coordinates 31.86^oN, 111.83 ^oE). These techniques include space-based in-situ data by Langmuir probes on board.European Space Agency (ESA) Swarm satellites, radio occultation measurements on board low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites from the COSMIC/FORMOSAT-3 mission and ground-based extrapolated topside electron density profiles from manually scaled ionograms. The measurements are also compared with International Reference Ionosphere Model (IRI-2016) topside estimations and IRI-corrected NeQuick topside formulation (method proposed by Pezzopane and Pignalberi (2019)). The comparison of Swarm and COSMIC observations with digisonde and IRI estimations verifies that in the majority of cases digisonde underestimates while IRI overestimates Swarm observations but in general, IRI provides a better topside representation than the digisonde. For COSMIC and digisonde profiles matched at the F layer peak the digisonde systematically underestimates topside COSMIC electron density values and the relative difference between COSMIC and digisonde increases with altitude (above hmF2), while IRI overestimates the topside COSMIC electron density but after a certain altitude (~150 km above hmF2) this overestimation starts to decrease with altitude. The IRI-corrected NeQuick underestimates the majority of topside COSMIC electron density profiles and relative difference is lower up to approximately 100 km (above the hmF2) and then it increases. The overall performance of IRI-corrected NeQuick improves with respect to IRI and digisonde.     

Regular features of the polar ionosphere characteristics from Digisonde measurements over Norilsk

Regular features of the polar ionosphere have been studied using its local empirical model of the electron density distribution in the bottomside ionosphere. The local empirical model was derived from the hand-scaled ionogram data recorded by DPS-4 Digisonde at Norilsk, Russia (69.4N, 88.1E; 60N GLAT, 166E GLON) for a 6-year period from December, 2002 to December, 2008. The paper describes the technique used to build the local empirical model and discusses its diurnal, seasonal, and solar activity specifications in comparison with the standard IRI-2007 climatological model for the same period of time, long-term observations from the European Incoherent Scatter UHF radar (1988–1999), and the high-latitude ionosondes data. Primary focus of the paper is behavior of the three F2 layer parameters: the F2 peak density (NmF2), the peak height (hmF2) and the bottomside thickness (B0). Special emphasis of the paper is the analysis of the winter anomaly manifestation at Norilsk and the peculiar diurnal–seasonal behavior of hmF2 under low solar activity, named as a “polar day effect”.     

Calibration of IRI–ITU-R peak density and height over the oceans with topside sounding data

Accuracy of IRI electron density profile depends on the F2 layer peak density and height converted by empirical formulae from the critical frequency and M3000F2 factor provided by the ITU-R (former CCIR). The CCIR/ITU-R maps generated from ground-based ionosonde measurements suffer from model assumptions, in particular, over the oceans where relatively few measurements are available due to a scarcity of ground-based ionosondes. In the present study a grid-point calibration of IRI/ITU-R maps for the foF2 and hmF2 over the oceans is proposed using modeling results based on the topside true-height profiles provided by ISIS1, ISIS2, IK-19 and Cosmos-1809 satellites for the period of 1969–1987. Topside soundings results are compared with IRI and the Russian standard model of ionosphere, SMI, and grouped to provide an empirical calibration coefficient to the peak density and height generated from ITU-R maps. The grid-point calibration coefficients maps are produced in terms of the solar activity, geodetic latitude and longitude, universal time and season allowing update of IRI–ITU-R predictions of the F2 layer peak parameters.     

Ionospheric behavior of the F2 peak parameters foF2 and hmF2 at Hainan and comparisons with IRI model predictions

Monthly median values of foF2, hmF2 and M(3000)F2 parameters, with hourly time interval resolution for the diurnal variation, obtained with DPS-4 digisonde observations at Hainan (19.4°N, 109.0°E) are used to study the low latitude ionospheric variation behavior. The observational results are compared with the International Reference Ionospheric Model (IRI) predictions. The time period coverage of the data used for the present study is from March 2002 to February 2005. Our present study showed that: (1) In general, IRI predictions using CCIR and URSI coefficients follow well the diurnal and seasonal variation patterns of the experimental values of foF2. However, CCIR foF2 and URSI foF2 IRI predictions systematically underestimate the observed results during most time period of the day, with the percentage difference ΔfoF2 (%) values changing between about −5% and −25%, whereas for a few hours around pre-sunrise, the IRI predictions generally overestimate the observational ones with ΔfoF2 (%) sometimes reaching as large as ∼30%. The agreement between the IRI results and the observational ones is better for the year 2002 than for the other years. The best agreement between the IRI results and the observational ones is obtained in summer when using URSI coefficients, with the seasonal average values of ΔfoF2 (%) being within the limits of ±10%. (2) In general, the IRI predicted hmF2 values using CCIR M(3000)F2 option shows a poor agreement with the observational results. However, when using the measured M(3000)F2 as input, the diurnal variation pattern of hmF2 given by IRI2001 has a much better agreement with the observational one with the detailed fine structures including the pre-sunrise and post-sunset peaks reproduced reasonably well. The agreement between the IRI predicted hmF2 values using CCIR M(30,000)F2 option and the observational ones is worst for the afternoon to post-midnight hours for the high solar activity year 2002. During daytime hours the agreement between the hmF2 values obtained with CCIR M(30,000)F2 option and the observational ones is best for summer season. The discrepancy between the observational hmF2 and that obtained with CCIR M(30,000)F2 option stem from the CCIR M(3000)F2 model, which does not produce the small scale structures observed in the measured M(3000)F2.     

NeQuick 2 and IRI Plas VTEC predictions for low latitude and South American sector

Using vertical total electron content (VTEC) measurements obtained from GPS satellite signals the capability of the NeQuick 2 and IRI Plas models to predict VTEC over the low latitude and South American sector is analyzed. In the present work both models were used to calculate VTEC up to the height of GPS satellites. Also, comparisons between the performance of IRI Plas and IRI 2007 have been done. The data correspond to June solstice and September equinox 1999 (high solar activity) and they were obtained at nine stations. The considered latitude range extends from 18.4°N to ?64.7°N and the longitude ranges from 281.3°E to 295.9°E in the South American sector. The greatest discrepancies among model predictions and the measured VTEC are obtained at low latitudes stations placed in the equatorial anomaly region. Underestimations as strong as 40?TECU [1?TECU?=?10¹⁶?m^?2] can be observed at BOGT station for September equinox, when NeQuick2 model is used. The obtained results also show that: (a) for June solstice, in general the performance of IRI Plas for low latitude stations is better than that of NeQuick2 and, vice versa, for highest latitudes the performance of NeQuick2 is better than that of IRI Plas. For the stations TUCU and SANT both models have good performance; (b) for September equinox the performances of the models do not follow a clearly defined pattern as in the other season. However, it can be seen that for the region placed between the Northern peak and the valley of the equatorial anomaly, in general, the performance of IRI Plas is better than that of NeQuick2 for hours of maximum ionization. From TUCU to the South, the best TEC predictions are given by NeQuick2.The source of the observed deviations of the models has been explored in terms of CCIR foF2 determination in the available ionosonde stations in the region. Discrepancies can be also related to an unrealistic shape of the vertical electron density profile and or an erroneous prediction of the plasmaspheric contribution to the vertical total electron content. Moreover, the results of this study could be suggesting that in the case of NeQuick, the underestimation trend could be due to the lack of a proper plasmaspheric model in its topside representation. In contrast, the plasmaspheric model included in IRI, leads to clear overestimations of GPS derived TEC.     

Comparison of topside electron density computed by ionospheric models and plasma density observed by DMSP satellites

Electron density obtained by IRI (topside options NeQuick and IRI-Corr) and NeQuick models in their standard versions have been compared with plasma density values measured by F13 and F15 DMSP satellites for years of different solar activities. A statistical study of the differences between modeled and experimental data has been carried out to investigate each model performance.     

Comparing topside and bottomside-measured characteristics of the F2 layer peak

The ionospheric characteristics of the F2 layer peak have been measured with ionosondes from the ground or with satellites from space. The most common characteristics are the F2-peak density NmF2 and peak height hmF2. In addition to these two parameters this paper studies the F2-peak scale height. Comparing the median values of hmF2 and NmF2 obtained from topside and bottomside sounding shows good agreement in general. The Chapman scale height values for the F2 layer peak derived from topside profiles, H_m,top, are generally several times larger than H_m,bot derived from bottomside profiles.     

Ionospheric electron density over Resolute Bay according to E-CHAIM model and RISR radar measurements

In this study, predictions of the E-CHAIM ionospheric model are compared with measurements by the incoherent scatter radars RISR at Resolute Bay, Canada, in the northern polar cap. Reasonable coverage was available for all seasons except winter for which no conclusions were drawn. It is shown that ratios of the model-to measured electron densities are close to unity in the central part of the F layer, around its peak. This is particularly evident for summer daytime. Distributions of the ratios are wider for other seasons indicating larger number of cases when the model underestimates or overestimates. E-CHAIM underestimates the electron density at ionospheric topside and bottomside by ～ 10–20 %. At the bottomside, the underestimations are strongest in summer and equinoctial nighttime. At the topside, the underestimations are strongest in autumn nighttime. Model overestimations are noticeable in the middle part of the F layer during dawn hours in autumn. Overall, the model tends to not predict highest-observed peak electron densities and the largest-observed heights of the peak.     

Validate the IRI2007 model by the COSMIC slant TEC data during the extremely solar minimum of 2008

During 2008, the solar activity is extremely low. The satellite observations show that the ionospheric height and electron density is much lower than the predictions by the international reference ionosphere (IRI) model. In this paper, we compared the slant total electron content (TEC) observed by the COSMIC satellites during 2008 with the IRI model results. It is found that the IRI model with IRI2001 and IRI2001 Cor. topside options will always overestimate the electron density in both lower and higher altitudes. But the rest two topside options (NeQuick, and TTS) tend to overestimate the electron density in the F layer and underestimate it in the topside altitudes. The switch altitude between overestimation and underestimation and the latitude-local time distribution of the model deviation depend on the topside option. The current investigation might be useful for the model improvement as well as data assimilation work based on the IRI model and the LEO TEC data.     

Performance of the IRI-2007 model for equatorial topside ion density in the African sector for low and extremely low solar activity

The recent availability of new data sets during the recent extreme solar minimum provides an opportunity for testing the performance of the International Reference Ionosphere in historically undersampled regions. This study presents averages and variability of topside ionospheric densities over Africa as a function of season, local time, altitude, and magnetic dip latitude as measured by the Communication/Navigation Outage Forecast System (C/NOFS) satellite. The results are compared to the three topside model options available in IRI-2007. Overall, the NeQuick model is found to have the best performance, though during the deepest part of the solar minimum all three options significantly overestimate density.     

Storm time behavior of topside scale height inferred from the ionosphere–plasmasphere model driven by the F2 layer peak and GPS-TEC observations

The International Reference Ionosphere model extended to the plasmasphere, IRI-Plas, presents global electron density profiles and total electron content, TECiri, up to the altitude of the GPS satellites (20,000 km). The model code is modified by input of GPS-derived total electron content, TECgps, so that the topside scale height, Hsc, is obtained minimizing in one step the difference between TECiri and TECgps observation. The topside basis scale height, Hsc, presents the distance in km above the peak height at which the peak plasma density, NmF2, decays by a factor of e (∼2.718). The ionosonde derived F2 layer peak density and height and GPS-derived TECgps data are used with IRI-Plas code during the main phase of more than 100 space weather storms for a period of 1999–2006. Data of seven stations are used for the analysis, and data from five other stations served as testing database. It is found that the topside basis scale height is growing (depressing) when the peak electron density (critical frequency foF2) and electron content are decreased (increased) compared to the median value, and vice versa. Relative variability of the scale height, rHsc, and the instantaneous Hsc are inferred analytically in a function of the instantaneous foF2, median fmF2 and median Hmsc avoiding a reference to geomagnetic indices. Results of validation suggest reliability of proposed algorithm for implementation in an operational mode.     

Reconstruction of topside density profile by using the topside sounder model profiler and digisonde data

To improve the accuracy of the real time topside electron density profiles given by the Digisonde software a new model-assisted technique is used. This technique uses the Topside Sounder Model (TSM), which provides the plasma scale height (H_s), O⁺–H⁺ transition height (H_T), and their ratio Rt = H_s/H_T, derived from topside sounder data of Alouette and ISIS satellites. The Topside Sounder Model Profiler (TSMP) incorporates TSM and uses the model quantities as anchor points in construction of topside density (Ne) profiles. For any particular location, TSMP calculates topside Ne profiles by specifying the values of foF2 and hmF2. In the present version, TSMP takes the F2 peak characteristics – foF2, hmF2, and the scale height at hmF2 – from the Digisonde measurements. The paper shows results for the Digisonde stations Athens and Juliusruh. It is found that the topside scale height used in Digisonde reconstruction is less than that extracted from topside sounder profiles. Rough comparison of their bulk distributions showed that they differ by an average factor of 1.25 for locations of Athens and Juliusruh. When the Digisonde scale heights are adjusted by this factor, the reconstructed topside profiles are close to those provided by TSM. Compared with CHAMP reconstruction profiles in two cases, TSMP/Digisonde profiles show lower density between 400 and 2000 km.     

Evaluation of the IRI-2007 model options for the topside electron density

The International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) 2007 provides two new options for the topside electron density profile: (a) a correction of the IRI-2001 model, and (b) the NeQuick topside formula. We use the large volume of Alouette 1, 2 and ISIS 1, 2 topside sounder data to evaluate these two new options with special emphasis on the uppermost topside where IRI-2001 showed the largest discrepancies. We will also study the accurate representation of profiles in the equatorial anomaly region where the profile function has to accommodate two latitudinal maxima (crests) at lower altitudes but only a single maximum (at the equator) higher up. In addition to IRI-2001 and the two new IRI-2007 options we also include the Intercosmos-based topside model of Triskova, Truhlik, and Smilauer [Triskova, L., Truhlik, V., Smilauer, J. An empirical topside electron density model for calculation of absolute ion densities in IRI. Adv. Space Res. 37 (5), 928–934, 2006] (TTS model) in our analysis. We find that overall IRI-2007-NeQ gives the best results but IRI-2007-corrected provides a more realistic representation of the altitudinal–latitudinal structure in the equatorial anomaly region. The applicability of the TTS model is limited by the fact that it is not normalized to the F2 peak density and height.     

Linkage of the ionospheric peak electron density and height deduced from the topside sounding data

Topside sounding electron density profiles are analyzed to explore interrelations of the F2 layer critical frequency and the peak height for a representative set of conditions provided by ISIS1, ISIS2, IK19 and Cosmos-1809 satellites for the period of 1969–1987. The foF2 and hmF2 are delivered with exponential extrapolation of electron density profile to zero of its 1st derivative. It is shown that the linear regression exists between foF2 and hmF2 under different conditions. The linkage between the two parameters amended to the empirical model of the peak height [Gulyaeva, T.L., Bradley, P.A., Stanislawska, I., Juchnikowski, G. Towards a new reference model of hmF2 for IRI. Adv. Space Res. 42, 666–672, doi:10.1016/j.asr.2008.02.021, 2008] results in an empirical model of the both foF2 and hmF2 expressed by superposition of functions in terms of local-time, season, geodetic longitude, modified dip latitude and solar activity. For the solar activity we use a proxy Fsp index averaged from the mean solar radio flux F10.7s for the past 81 days (3 solar rotations) and F10.7 value for 1 day prior the day of observation. Impact of geomagnetic activity is not discernible with the topside sounding data due to mixed positive and negative storm-time effects. Appreciable differences have been revealed between IRI-CCIR predictions and outcome of the new model which might be attributed to the different techniques of the peak electron density and height derivation, different epochs and different global distribution of the source data as well as the different mathematical functions involved in the maps and the model presentation.     

Towards a new reference model of hmF2 for IRI

A numerical model of the peak height of the F2 layer, hmF2_top, is derived from the topside sounding database of 90,000 electron density profiles for a representative set of conditions provided by ISIS1, ISIS2, IK19 and Cosmos-1809 satellites for the period of 1969–1987. The model of regular hmF2 variations is produced in terms of local time, season, geomagnetic latitude, geodetic longitude and solar radio flux. No geomagnetic activity trends were discernible in the topside sounding data. The nighttime peak of hmF2_top evident for mid-latitudes disappears near the geomagnetic equator where a maximum of hmF2_top occurs at sunset hours when it can exceed 500 km at solar maximum. The hmF2 given by the IRI exceeds hmF2_top at the low solar activities. The hmF2_top, obtained by extrapolation of the first derivative of the topside profile to zero shows saturation similar to foF2 the greater the solar activity. The proposed model differs from hmF2 given by IRI based on M(3000)F2 to hmF2 conversion by empirical relationships in terms of foF2, foE and R12 with these quantities mapped globally by the ITU-R (former CCIR) from ground-based ionosonde data. The differences can be attributed to the different techniques of the peak height derivation, different epochs and different global distribution of the source data as well as the different mathematical functions involved in the maps and the model presentation.     

Effects of geomagnetic storms on the bottomside ionospheric F region

The geomagnetic storm is a complex process of solar wind/magnetospheric origin. The variability of the ionospheric parameters increases substantially during geomagnetic storms initiated by solar disturbances. Various features of geomagnetic storm act at various altitudes in the ionosphere and neutral atmosphere. The paper deals with variability of the electron density of the ionospheric bottomside F region at every 10 km of altitude during intense geomagnetic storms with attention paid mainly to the distribution of the F1 region daytime ionisation. We have analysed all available electron density profiles from some European middle latitude stations (Chilton, Pruhonice, Ebro, Arenosillo, Athens) for 36 events that occurred in different seasons and under different levels of solar activity (1995–2003). Selected events consist of both depletion and increase of the F2 region electron density. For European higher middle and middle latitude the F1 region response to geomagnetic storm was found to be negative (decrease of electron density) independent on the storm effect on the F2 region. For lower middle latitude the F1 response is weaker and less regular. Results of the analysis also show that the maximum of the storm effect may sometimes occur below the height of the maximum of electron density (NmF2).     

The interest of information obtained by incoherent scatter technique

Incoherent scatter measurements are of great value for establishing and improving the IRI. This holds, in particular, for the topside electron density profile, for the valley occurring under certain conditions between regions E and F, and for the electron and ion temperature profiles. Extension in time of the observations could be very helpful for future work on IRI.     

Comparison of model and experimental ionospheric parameters at high latitudes

Modern use and study of the auroral region needs to attract a wider class of models for describing conditions of radio wave propagation in the ionosphere. In this paper the possibilities of the International Reference Ionosphere model, well-proven and widespread in the mid-latitudes, are investigated in the high latitude zone. Model and measured values of the critical frequency foF2 for two mid-latitude stations (Juliusruh and Goosebay) and four high-latitude ones (Loparskaya, Sodankyla, Sondrestrom, Thule) are compared. Deviations of medians, variations from day to day and solar activity trends seemed to be similar for both areas. This similarity is irrespective of the RZ12 index. Special attention is paid to the TEC parameter and its determination using 6 versions of models, a new version of the model IRI2010 (IRI-Plas) among them. It is shown that the IRI-Plas model significantly improves the definition of TEC in contrast to the versions of IRI2007 and the new model NeQuick. The use of the median of the experimental equivalent slab thickness, together with the current values of the TEC, increases by a factor of two the agreement between calculated and measured foF2 values as compared with the variations from day to day. This allows foF2 to be defined in near-real time.