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.     

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.     

Examining the use of the NeQuick bottomside and topside parameterizations at high latitudes

An examination of the high latitude performance of the bottomside and topside F-layer parameterizations of the NeQuick electron density model is presented using measurements from high latitude ionosonde and Incoherent Scatter Radar (ISR) facilities.For the bottomside, we present a comparison between modeled and measured B2Bot thickness parameter. In this comparison, it is seen that the use of the NeQuick parameterization at high latitudes results in significantly underestimated bottomside thicknesses, regularly exceeding 50%. We show that these errors can be attributed to two main issues in the NeQuick parameterization:(1) through the relationship relating foF2 and M3000F2 to the maximum derivative of F2 electron density, which is used to derive the bottomside thickness, and (2) through a fundamental inability of a constant thickness parameter, semi-Epstein shape function to fit the curvature of the high latitude F-region electron density profile.For the topside, a comparison is undertaken between the NeQuick topside thickness parameterization, using measured and CCIR-modeled ionospheric parameters, and that derived from fitting the NeQuick topside function to Incoherent Scatter Radar-measured topside electron density profiles. Through this comparison, we show that using CCIR-derived foF2 and M3000F2, used in both the NeQuick and IRI, results in significantly underestimated topside thickness during summer periods, overestimated thickness during winter periods, and an overall tendency to underestimate diurnal, seasonal, and solar cycle variability. These issues see no improvement through the use of measured foF2 and M(3000)F2 values. Such measured parameters result in a tendency for the parametrization to produce a declining trend in topside thickness with increasing solar activity, to produce damped seasonal variations, and to produce significantly overestimated topside thickness during winter periods.     

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.     

GNSS single frequency ionospheric range delay corrections: NeQuick data ingestion technique

A study of the performance of the NeQuick model and the Klobuchar model for GNSS single frequency range delay correction on a global scale was done using data for moderate solar activity. In this study NeQuick was used in the way intended for Galileo. This study is to assess the performance of the two models at each ionospheric geographic region during moderate solar activity as previously published studies were concentrated only on high solar activity. The results obtained showed that NeQuick outperformed Klobuchar for the whole year at the three geographical regions of the ionosphere. In terms of monthly root mean square of mismodeling, NeQuick outperformed Klobuchar by 15 TECU or more at low-latitudes, 5 TEC or more at mid-latitudes, and 1 TECU or more at high-latitudes.     

Comparing TOPEX TEC measurements with IRI predictions

TEC values obtained from TOPEX satellite were compared with the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) 2001 model estimates. The present work also shows results of the IRI model with the option of a new topside electron density distribution (NeQuick model). TOPEX TEC measurements, which include years of high and middle to low solar activity (2000 and 2004), were analyzed by binning the region covered by the satellite (±66°) every five degrees of modip. In general, there is good agreement between IRI predictions and Topex measurements. Cases with large disagreements are observed at low and high latitudes during high solar activity. Comparing the model predictions using the default IRI2001 model and the NeQuick topside option show that the default IRI 2001 version represents the observed data in a more realistic way, but appears to be less reliable at high and low latitudes in some cases.     

Estimation of probability of occurrence of F1 layer or L condition using tables and electron density profile models

An algorithm is proposed for evaluation of the probability of occurrence of an F1 layer or L condition, based on tables. Observations independent of the tables database are used for comparison between the estimated probability of occurrence, the formulation used at present in IRI, and the occurrence actually observed. The importance of the inclusion of L condition in the electron density profile model is shown.     

Bottom side profiles for two close stations at the southern crest of the EIA: Differences and comparison with IRI-2012 and NeQuick2 for low and high solar activity

Bottom side electron density profiles for two stations at the southern crest of the Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA), São José dos Campos (23.1°S, 314.5°E, dip latitude 19.8°S; Brazil) and Tucumán (26.9°S, 294.6°E, dip latitude 14.0°S; Argentina), located at similar latitude and separated by only 20° in longitude, have been compared during equinoctial, winter and summer months under low (year 2008, minimum of the solar cycle 23/24) and high solar activity (years 2013–2014, maximum of the solar cycle 24) conditions. An analysis of parameters describing the bottom side part of the electron density profile, namely the peak electron density NmF2, the height hmF2 at which it is reached, the thickness parameter B₀ and the shape parameter B₁, is carried out. Further, a comparison of bottom side profiles and F-layer parameters with the corresponding outputs of IRI-2012 and NeQuick2 models is also reported. The variations of NmF2 at both stations reveal the absence of semi-annual anomaly for low solar activity (LSA), evidencing the anomalous activity of the last solar minimum, while those related to hmF2 show an uplift of the ionosphere for high solar activity (HSA). As expected, the EIA is particularly visible at both stations during equinox for HSA, when its strength is at maximum in the South American sector. Despite the similar latitude of the two stations upon the southern crest of the EIA, the anomaly effect is more pronounced at Tucumán than at São José dos Campos. The differences encountered between these very close stations suggest that in this sector relevant longitudinal-dependent variations could occur, with the longitudinal gradient of the Equatorial Electrojet that plays a key role to explain such differences together with the 5.8° separation in dip latitude between the two ionosondes. Furthermore at Tucumán, the daily peak value of NmF2 around 21:00 LT during equinox for HSA is in temporal coincidence with an impulsive enhancement of hmF2, showing a kind of “elastic rebound” under the action of the EIA. IRI-2012 and NeQuick2 bottom side profiles show significant deviations from ionosonde observations. In particular, both models provide a clear underestimation of the EIA strength at both stations, with more pronounced differences for Tucumán. Large discrepancies are obtained for the parameter hmF2 for HSA during daytime at São José dos Campos, where clear underestimations made by both models are observed. The shape parameter B₀ is quite well described by the IRI-2012 model, with very good agreement in particular during equinox for both stations for both LSA and HSA. On the contrary, the two models show poor agreements with ionosonde data concerning the shape parameter B₁.     

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.     

NeQuick2 validation using multi-satellite and ground data

Global Navigation Satellite System’s (GNSS) positioning calculation is prone to ionospheric errors. Single frequency GNSS users receive ionospheric corrections through broadcast ionospheric models. Therefore, the accuracy of ionospheric models must be validated based on various geographic and geomagnetic conditions. In this work, an attempt is made to validate NeQuick2 electron density (Ne) using multiple sources of space-based and ground-based data at the Arabian Peninsula and for low solar activity conditions. These sources include space-based data from Swarm, DMSP and COSMIC-2 satellite constellations and ground-based data from GNSS receiver and the ionosonde. The period of this study is 1 year from October 2019 to September 2020. Analysis shows that the agreement between NeQuick2 and experimental Ne close to the peak density height depends on seasons and time of the day with the largest errors found in Autumn and during the daytime. NeQuick2 generally overestimates Ne during the daytime. During the early morning and evening hours, Ne estimates seem to be fairly accurate with slight underestimation in Winter and Spring. Estimation of slab thickness by NeQuick2 is found to be close to the values calculated using collocated ionosonde and GNSS receiver.     

Comparison of GPS-TEC measurements with NeQuick2 and IRI model predictions in the low latitude East African region during varying solar activity period (1998 and 2008–2015)

This paper examines the performances of NeQuick2, the latest available IRI-2016, IRI-2012 and IRI-2007 models in describing the monthly and seasonal mean total electron content (TEC) over the East African region. This is to gain insight into the success of the various model types and versions at characterizing the ionosphere within the equatorial ionization anomaly. TEC derived from five Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers installed at Addis Ababa (ADD, 5.33°N, 111.99°E Geog.), Asab (ASAB, 8.67°N, 116.44°E Geog.), Ambo (ABOO, 5.43°N, 111.05°E Geog.), Nairobi (RCMN, ?4.48°N, 108.46°E Geog.) and Nazret (NAZR, 4.78°N, 112.43°E Geog.), are compared with the corresponding values computed using those models during varying solar activity period (1998 and 2008–2015). We found that different models describe the equatorial and anomaly region ionosphere best depending on solar cycle, season and geomagnetic activity levels. Our results show that IRI-2016 is the best model (compared to others in terms of discrepancy range) in estimating the monthly mean GPS-TEC at NAZR, ADD and RCMN stations except at ADD during 2008 and 2012. It is also found that IRI-2012 is the best model in estimating the monthly mean TEC at ABOO station in 2014. IRI show better agreement with observations during June solstice for all the years studied at ADD except in 2012 where NeQuick2 better performs. At NAZR, NeQuick2 better performs in estimating seasonal mean GPS-TEC during 2011, while IRI models are best during 2008–2009. Both NeQuick2 and IRI models underestimate measured TEC for all the seasons at ADD in 2010 but overestimate at NAZR in 2009 and RCMN in 2008. The periodic variations of experimental and modeled TEC have been compared with solar and geomagnetic indices at ABOO and ASAB in 2014 and results indicate that the F10.7 and sunspot number as indices of solar activity seriously affects the TEC variations with periods of 16–32?days followed by the geomagnetic activity on shorter timescales (roughly periods of less than 16?days). In this case, NeQuick2 derived TEC shows better agreement with a long term period variations of GPS-TEC, while IRI-2016 and IRI-2007 show better agreement with observations during short term periodic variations. This indicates that the dependence of NeQuick2 derived TEC on F10.7 is seasonal. Hence, we suggest that representation of geomagnetic activity indices is required for better performance over the low latitude region.     

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.     

Assessment of precision in ionospheric electron density profiles retrieved by GPS radio occultations

The Constellation Observing System for Meteorology Ionosphere and Climate (COSMIC) is a six satellite radio occultation mission that was launched in April 2006. The close proximity of these satellites during some months after launch provides a unique opportunity to evaluate the precision of Global Positioning System (GPS) radio occultation (RO) retrievals of ionospheric electron density from nearly collocated and simultaneous observations. RO data from 30 consecutive days during July and August 2006 are divided into ten groups in terms of daytime or nighttime and latitude. In all cases, the best precision values (about 1%) are found at the F peak height and they slightly degrade upwards. For all daytime groups, it is seen that electron density profiles above about 120 km height exhibit a substantial improvement in precision. Nighttime groups are rather diverse: in particular, the precision becomes better than 10% above different levels between 120 and 200 km height. Our overall results show that up to 100–200 km (depending on each group), the uncertainty associated with the precision is in the order of the measured electron density values. Even worse, the retrieved values tend sometimes to be negative. Although we cannot rely directly on electron density values at these altitudes, the shape of the profiles could be indicative of some ionospheric features (e.g. waves and sporadic E layers). Above 200 km, the profiles of precision are qualitatively quite independent from daytime or latitude. From all the nearly collocated pairs studied, only 49 exhibited a difference between line of sight angles of both RO at the F peak height larger than 10°. After analyzing them we find no clear indications of a significant representativeness error in electron density profiles due to the spherical assumption above 120 km height. Differences in precision between setting and rising GPS RO may be attributed to the modification of the processing algorithms applied to rising cases during the initial period of the COSMIC mission.     

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.     

Ionospheric climate index as a driving parameter for the NeQuick model

Ionospheric delay is one of the significant error sources for global navigation satellite system (GNSS) positioning. GNSSs broadcast the coefficients of the ionospheric model to correct ionospheric delay for single-frequency users. A modified three-dimensional model (NeQuick G) based on the NeQuick climatological model is adopted for Galileo users. The NeQuick G model uses the effective ionization level (Az) instead of the sunspot number as the driving parameter. In this study, we introduce the ionospheric climate index (ICI) as a new driving parameter for the NeQuick model. In comparison, the ICI-driven NeQuick model has a better performance than the Az-driven NeQuick G model at both low and high latitudes. In addition, only one GNSS station at low latitudes is required to calculate the ICI, which would save maintenance costs and improve the efficiency of updating the broadcast coefficients. This model has potential application value for future upgrades of Galileo’s ionospheric broadcast model.     

Validation of B2bot in the NeQuick model during high solar activity at Hainan station

NeQuick ionospheric electron density model, which has been developed to version 2, produces the full electron density profile in the ionosphere. Each part of the profile is modeled using Epstein layer formalism. Simple empirical relations are used to compute the thicknesses of each layer. In order to validate the B2_bot parameter in the NeQuick model during high solar activity, we use the data at Hainan, China (109.1°E, 19.5°N; Geomagnetic coordinates: 178.95°E, 8.1°N), measured with DPS-4, and study the diurnal and seasonal variations of B2_bot, ΔB2 (B2_best − B2_NeQuick 2) and the seasonal median values of B2_best/B2_NeQuick 2 at that region. The results show that, (1) The differences between B2_best and B2_NeQuick 2 have diurnal and seasonal variations. (2) The diurnal variations of B2_NeQuick 2 are smaller than those of B2_best. (3) Generally, except for early morning the experimental values are properly reproduced. (4) Generally, during morning the NeQuick model has an underestimation. The magnitude of underestimation varies with LT and season.     

NeQuick G model based scale factor determination for using SBAS ionosphere corrections at low earth orbit

A space-based augmentation system (SBAS) provides real-time correction data for global navigation satellite system (GNSS) users near ground. In order to use the SBAS ionosphere correction for low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites, the correction should be scaled down for the LEO altitude. This scale factor varies with ionosphere distribution and it is hard to determine the value at LEO in real time. We propose a real-time scale factor determination method by using Galileo GNSS’s NeQuick G model. A LEO satellite GPS data and SBAS data received on ground were used to evaluate the performance of the NeQuick G derived variable scale factor. The NeQuick G derived scale factor shows a significant accuracy improvement over NeQuick G model or pre-determined constant scale factor. It improves a vertical positioning accuracy of the LEO satellite. The error mean reductions of the vertical positioning over NeQuick G and the constant scale factor are 31.5% and 11.7%, respectively.     

Validation of FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC radio occultation electron density profiles by incoherent scatter radar data

Low Earth Orbiting satellites carrying a dual frequency GPS receiver onboard offer a unique opportunity to remote sensing of the global ionosphere on a continuous basis. No other profiling technique unifies profiling through the entire F2-layer with global coverage. The FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC data can make a positive impact on the global ionosphere study providing essential information about the height electron density distribution and particularly over regions that are not accessible with ground-based measuring instruments such as ionosondes and GPS dual frequency receivers. Therefore, it is important to verify occultation profiles with other techniques and to obtain experience in the reliability of their derivation. In the given study we present results of comparison of the electron density profiles derived from radio occultation measurements on-board FS-3/COSMIC and from the Kharkov incoherent scatter radar sounding.     

Characteristics of field line resonance type geomagnetic pulsations and variations of plasmaspheric plasma density distribution

The period of field line resonance (FLR) type geomagnetic pulsations depends on the length of the field line and on the plasma density in the inner magnetosphere (plasmasphere), where field lines are closed. Here as FLR period, the period belonging to the maximum occurrence frequency of the occurrence frequency spectrum (equivalent resonance curve) of pulsations has been considered. The resonance system may be replaced by an equivalent resonant circuit. The plasma density would correspond to the ohmic load. The plasma in the plasmasphere originates from the ionosphere, thus FLR period, occurrence frequency are also affected by the maximum electron density in the ionosphere. The FLR period has shown an enhancement with increasing F region electron density, while the occurrence frequency indicated diminishing trend (possible damping effect). Thus, the increased plasma density may be the cause of the decreased occurrence of FLR type pulsations in the winter months of solar activity maximum years (winter anomaly).     

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.