Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userSolar cycle prediction
174
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Kristof Petrovay
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
A review of solar cycle prediction methods and their performance is given, including early forecasts for cycle 25. The review focuses on those aspects of the solar cycle prediction problem that have a bearing on dynamo theory. The scope of the review is further restricted to the issue of predicting the amplitude (and optionally the epoch) of an upcoming solar maximum no later than right after the start of the given cycle. In their overall performance during the course of the last few solar cycles, precursor methods have clearly been superior to extrapolation methods. One method that has yielded predictions consistently in the right range during the past few solar cycles is the polar field precursor. Nevertheless, some extrapolation methods may still be worth further study. Model based forecasts are quickly coming into their own, and, despite not having a long proven record, their predictions are received with increasing confidence by the community.
rate research
Read More
A review of solar cycle prediction methods and their performance is given, including forecasts for cycle 24 and focusing on aspects of the solar cycle prediction problem that have a bearing on dynamo theory. The scope of the review is further restricted to the issue of predicting the amplitude (and optionally the epoch) of an upcoming solar maximum no later than right after the start of the given cycle. Prediction methods form three main groups. Precursor methods rely on the value of some measure of solar activity or magnetism at a specified time to predict the amplitude of the following solar maximum. Their implicit assumption is that each numbered solar cycle is a consistent unit in itself, while solar activity seems to consist of a series of much less tightly intercorrelated individual cycles. Extrapolation methods, in contrast, are based on the premise that the physical process giving rise to the sunspot number record is statistically homogeneous, i.e., the mathematical regularities underlying its variations are the same at any point of time, and therefore it lends itself to analysis and forecasting by time series methods. Finally, instead of an analysis of observational data alone, model based predictions use physically (more or less) consistent dynamo models in their attempts to predict solar activity. In their overall performance precursor methods have clearly been superior to extrapolation methods. Nevertheless, some extrapolation methods may still be worth further study. Model based forecasts have not yet have had a chance to prove their skills. One method that has yielded predictions consistently in the right range during the past few solar cycles is that of K. Schatten et al., whose approach is mainly based on the polar field precursor. The incipient cycle 24 will probably mark the end of the Modern Maximum, with the Sun switching to a state of less strong activity.
Solar activity forecasting is an important topic for numerous scientific and technological areas, such as space mission operations, electric power transmission lines, power transformation stations and earth geophysical and climatic impact. Nevertheless, the well-known difficulty is how to accurately predict, on the basis of various recorded solar activity indices, the complete evolution of future solar cycles, due to highly complex dynamical and stochastic processes involved, mainly related to interaction of different components of internal magnetic fields. There are two main distinct classes of solar cycle prediction methods: the precursor-like ones and the mathematical-numerical ones. The main characteristic of precursor techniques, both purely solar and geomagnetic, is their physical basis. Conversely, the non-precursor methods use different mathematical and/or numerical properties of the known temporal evolution of solar activity indices to extract useful information for predicting future activity. For current solar cycle #24 we obtained fairly good statistical performances from both precursor and purely numerical methods, such as the so-called solar precursor and nonlinear ones. To further check the performances of these prediction techniques, we compared the early predictions for the next solar cycle #25. Preliminary results support some coherence of the prediction methods considered and confirm the current trend of a relatively low solar activity.
Solar activity cycle varies in amplitude. The last Cycle 24 is the weakest in the past century. Suns activity dominates Earths space environment. The frequency and intensity of the Suns activity are accordant with the solar cycle. Hence there are practical needs to know the amplitude of the upcoming Cycle 25. The dynamo-based solar cycle predictions not only provide predictions, but also offer an effective way to evaluate our understanding of the solar cycle. In this article we apply the method of the first successful dynamo-based prediction developed for Cycle 24 to the prediction of Cycle 25, so that we can verify whether the previous success is repeatable. The prediction shows that Cycle 25 would be about 10% stronger than Cycle 24 with an amplitude of 126 (international sunspot number version 2.0). The result suggests that Cycle 25 will not enter the Maunder-like grand solar minimum as suggested by some publications. Solar behavior in about four to five years will give a verdict whether the prediction method captures the key mechanism for solar cycle variability, which is assumed as the polar field around the cycle minimum in the model.
Aims. We report the small temporal variation of the axial dipole moment near the solar minimum and its application to the solar cycle prediction by the surface flux transport (SFT) model. Methods. We measure the axial dipole moment using the photospheric synoptic magnetogram observed by the Wilcox Solar Observatory (WSO), the ESA/NASA Solar and Heliospheric Observatory Michelson Doppler Imager (MDI), and the NASA Solar Dynamics Observatory Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI). We also use the surface flux transport model for the interpretation and prediction of the observed axial dipole moment. Results. We find that the observed axial dipole moment becomes approximately constant during the period of several years before each cycle minimum, which we call the axial dipole moment plateau. The cross-equatorial magnetic flux transport is found to be small during the period, although the significant number of sunspots are still emerging. The results indicates that the newly emerged magnetic flux does not contributes to the build up of the axial dipole moment near the end of each cycle. This is confirmed by showing that the time variation of the observed axial dipole moment agrees well with that predicted by the SFT model without introducing new emergence of magnetic flux. These results allows us to predict the axial dipole moment in Cycle 24/25 minimum using the SFT model without introducing new flux emergence. The predicted axial dipole moment of Cycle 24/25 minimum is 60--80 percent of Cycle 23/24 minimum, which suggests the amplitude of Cycle 25 even weaker than the current Cycle 24. Conclusions. The plateau of the solar axial dipole moment is an important feature for the longer prediction of the solar cycle based on the SFT model.
The paper presents results of a search for helioseismic events (sunquakes) produced by M-X class solar flares during Solar Cycle 24. The search is performed by analyzing photospheric Dopplergrams from Helioseismic Magnetic Imager (HMI). Among the total number of 500 M-X class flares, 94 helioseismic events were detected. Our analysis has shown that many strong sunquakes were produced by solar flares of low M class (M1-M5), while in some powerful X-class flares helioseismic waves were not observed or were weak. Our study also revealed that only several active regions were characterized by the most efficient generation of helioseismic waves during flares. We found that the sunquake power correlates with the maximum value of the soft X-ray flux time derivative better than with the X-ray class, indicating that the sunquake mechanism is associated with high-energy particles. We also show that the seismically active flares are more impulsive than the flares without helioseismic perturbations. We present a new catalog of helioseismic solar flares, which opens opportunities for performing statistical studies to better understand the physics of sunquakes as well as the flare energy release and transport.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
