Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Analysis of Ionospheric VTEC Retrieved from Multi-Instrument Observations

View through CrossRef
This study examines the Vertical Total Electron Content (VTEC) estimation performance of multi-instruments on a global scale during different ionospheric conditions. For this purpose, GNSS-based VTEC data from Global Ionosphere Maps (GIMs), COSMIC (F7/C2)—Feng–Yun 3C (FY3C) radio occultation (RO) VTEC, SWARM–VTEC, and JASON–VTEC were utilized. VTEC assessments were conducted on three distinct days: geomagnetic active (17 March 2015), solar active (22 December 2021), and quiet (11 December 2021). The VTEC values of COSMIC/FY3C RO, SWARM, and JASON were compared with data retrieved from GIMs. According to the results, COSMIC RO–VTEC is more consistent with GIM–VTEC on a quiet day (the mean of the differences is 4.38 TECU), while the mean of FY3C RO–GIM differences is 7.33 TECU on a geomagnetic active day. The range of VTEC differences between JASON and GIM is relatively smaller on a quiet day, and the mean of differences on active/quiet days is less than 6 TECU. Besides the daily comparison, long-term results (1 January–31 December 2015) were also analyzed by considering active and quiet periods. Results show that Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values of COSMIC RO, FY3C RO, SWARM, and JASON are 5.02 TECU, 6.81 TECU, 16.25 TECU, and 5.53 TECU for the quiet period, and 5.21 TECU, 7.07 TECU, 17.48 TECU, and 5.90 TECU for the active period, respectively. The accuracy of each data source was affected by solar/geomagnetic activities. The deviation of SWARM–VTEC is relatively greater. The main reason for the significant differences in SWARM–GIM results is the atmospheric measurement range of SWARM satellites (460 km–20,200 km (SWARM A, C) and 520 km–20,200 km (SWARM B), which do not contain a significant part of the ionosphere in terms of VTEC estimation.
Title: Analysis of Ionospheric VTEC Retrieved from Multi-Instrument Observations
Description:
This study examines the Vertical Total Electron Content (VTEC) estimation performance of multi-instruments on a global scale during different ionospheric conditions.
For this purpose, GNSS-based VTEC data from Global Ionosphere Maps (GIMs), COSMIC (F7/C2)—Feng–Yun 3C (FY3C) radio occultation (RO) VTEC, SWARM–VTEC, and JASON–VTEC were utilized.
VTEC assessments were conducted on three distinct days: geomagnetic active (17 March 2015), solar active (22 December 2021), and quiet (11 December 2021).
The VTEC values of COSMIC/FY3C RO, SWARM, and JASON were compared with data retrieved from GIMs.
According to the results, COSMIC RO–VTEC is more consistent with GIM–VTEC on a quiet day (the mean of the differences is 4.
38 TECU), while the mean of FY3C RO–GIM differences is 7.
33 TECU on a geomagnetic active day.
The range of VTEC differences between JASON and GIM is relatively smaller on a quiet day, and the mean of differences on active/quiet days is less than 6 TECU.
Besides the daily comparison, long-term results (1 January–31 December 2015) were also analyzed by considering active and quiet periods.
Results show that Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values of COSMIC RO, FY3C RO, SWARM, and JASON are 5.
02 TECU, 6.
81 TECU, 16.
25 TECU, and 5.
53 TECU for the quiet period, and 5.
21 TECU, 7.
07 TECU, 17.
48 TECU, and 5.
90 TECU for the active period, respectively.
The accuracy of each data source was affected by solar/geomagnetic activities.
The deviation of SWARM–VTEC is relatively greater.
The main reason for the significant differences in SWARM–GIM results is the atmospheric measurement range of SWARM satellites (460 km–20,200 km (SWARM A, C) and 520 km–20,200 km (SWARM B), which do not contain a significant part of the ionosphere in terms of VTEC estimation.

Related Results

Contributions to ionospheric electron density retrieval
Contributions to ionospheric electron density retrieval
La transformada de Abel es una técnica de inversión usada frecuentemente en radio ocultaciones (RO) que, en el contexto ionosférico, permite deducir densidades electrónicas a parti...
Modeling Ionospheric TEC Using Gradient Boosting Based and Stacking Machine Learning Techniques
Modeling Ionospheric TEC Using Gradient Boosting Based and Stacking Machine Learning Techniques
AbstractAccurately predicting and modeling the ionospheric total electron content (TEC) can greatly improve the accuracy of satellite navigation and positioning and help to correct...
Total electron content driven data products of SIMuRG
Total electron content driven data products of SIMuRG
<p>System for the Ionosphere Monitoring and Researching from GNSS (SIMuRG, see <em>https://simurg.iszf.irk.ru</em>) has been developed in ...
Advancing Ionospheric Predictions in North Africa: A Deep Learning Approach Integrating Ground and Satellite GNSS observations
Advancing Ionospheric Predictions in North Africa: A Deep Learning Approach Integrating Ground and Satellite GNSS observations
The North Africa region faces significant challenges due to the need for ionospheric ground observational data, complicating efforts to achieve accurate predictions. Our study stra...
Non-spherical symmetric inversion of ionospheric occultation data
Non-spherical symmetric inversion of ionospheric occultation data
The Abel inversion based on a spherical symmetry of the ionospheric electron density distribution is a traditional inversion method of ionospheric occultation. However, the real io...
Early time effects produced by neutral gas ionospheric chemical release
Early time effects produced by neutral gas ionospheric chemical release
The artificial release of electron adsorbing material can cause electron density to be depleted in the ionosphere, forming the ionospheric holes rapidly. At the same time, the shel...

Back to Top