Model

2
McIlwain in 1966 identifies 5
Processes acting upon outer
zone electrons
Process 1: Rapid non adiabatic acceleration
Process 2: Persistent decay
Process 3: Radial Diffusion
Process 4: Adiabatic Acceleration
Process 5: Rapid Loss
(From McIlwain, 1996 AGU)
Measured radiation dose (black) compared to
the static model prediction (red) based on flux
averages (see Glossy brochure of the SREM
from Contraves-PSI)
Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times Introduction
3
|
st
= Steady state flux measured
A|
n
= The expected flux variation following a storm (average)
A|
res
= Diff. between. flux before storm and steady state flux
T = Decay time of flux for a given position and energy
o = Time elapsed from the storm min. Dst
_prev
(or drop-
out min) to |
0
(Maximum flux)

N = Number of bins in Dst range

S = Solar par. that indicates phase within the solar cycle
Type = Type of storm: CME, CIR, Mix
AF
(Dst_prev)
= Flux var. induced by prev. storm of min Dst
prev

Dst
prev
= The min. value reached by Dst in the prev. storm









.
.
.

) _ ( 0 prev DST res st F A + A + = | | |
1
/
0 1 ) ( | | | | |
o
A + + =
T
st st e
2
/
1 2 ) ( | | | | |
o
A + + =
T
st st e
n
T
st n st n e | | | | |
o
A + + =

/
1 ) (
) (
0
) ( ) , , , (

=
A = A
N
k
Dst s type Dst n Dst n k prev k F P o |
L. Mazzino, et al (2008)
T
flux = steady state background + geomagnetic activity dependent value
Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times Introduction
4
Introduction GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
~100 days
|
st
n
T
st n st n e | | | | |
o
A + + =

/
1 ) (
Steady state
5
u
st
as a function of L (B>0.3 G)

u
st
as a function of longitude,
latitude and altitude
Introduction GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times Steady state
6
Black dots correspond to Dst minimum of the GS. The number of storms is outlined for each of the solar
cycles (orange). Solar maximum and minimum activity are delineated (green and blue lines respectively,
dates indicated), corresponding to solar cycles 19 (incomplete), 20, 21, 22 and 23. Sunspot number is
plotted on the black curve with superimposed smoothed curve in red.
Introduction Steady state Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
) (
0
) ( ) , , , (

=
A = A
N
k
Dst s type Dst n Dst n k prev k F P o |
GS probabilities
50 years of Dst and sunspot number data, including ~1200 storms have been analyzed
7
Probability of having a GS of a given
Dst
k
after a previous GS of any
magnitude, for the declining phase .
Probability of two successive GS
with a given time interval, for the
declining phase of the different solar
cycles Poisson distribution
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
Nice agreement with: Tsubouchi and Omura, Long-
term occurrence probabilities of intense geomagnetic
storm events, Space Weather, 2007
8
(Picture: Courtesy of CNES)
http://smsc.cnes.fr/DEMETER/
(Picture: Courtesy of CONAE)
http://www.conae.gov.ar/sac-c/
DEMETER/IDP SAC-C/ICARE
Electron fluxes data: Two LEO Satellites, E
e
= 200 keV 1.2 MeV
Orbit at 710 km
98.23 deg. Incl.
Orbit at 702 km
98.2 deg. Incl.
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Conclusion Decay times
n
T
st n st n e | | | | |
o
A + + =

/
1 ) (
) (
0
) ( ) , , , (

=
A = A
N
k
Dst s type Dst n Dst n k prev k F P o |
AF and o as a function of GS type
Flux variations
9
Flux enhancement (AF) and Time interval between storm and flux max (o)
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
10
TYPE 1 (mainly CME)
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
TYPE 2 (mainly CIR)
Kataoka and Miyoshi, Flux enhancement of radiation belt
electrons during geomagnetic storms driven by coronal mass
ejections and corotating interaction regions. Space weather,
2006
Storm type definition
short ABz/At, peak, At ~3-4h long ABz/At, inconsistent, At >7h
11
The time interval between magnetic storm and flux maximum (o) seems to
be linear for the classified isolated storms, but random for all other
storms. Need more parameters
TYPE 1(yellow), TYPE 2 (red)
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
12
Resultant flux enhancement AF as a function of storm severity,
corresponding to isolated TYPE 1 (yellow), TYPE 2 (red), and
mixed non isolated storms (blue)
Introduction RABEM Model Dat and parameters Results Summary Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
13
L-parameter
s
l
o
p
e

TYPE 1
s
l
o
p
e

L-parameter
TYPE 2
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
At low L the flux enhancement
increases steeper with Dst
min
(slope >
0) for lower energies
At high L the flux enhancement
decreases steeper with Dst
min
(slope
<0) for lower energies.
For all L values, the flux
enhancement increases steeper
with Dst
min
(slope >0) for lower
energies
For all energies the slope
decreases with L
14
Decay time constant (loss timescales) of electron fluxes (T)
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
Condition of measurement:
The time resolution is 12 h
The maximum flux after storm must
occur 3 days before the defined end
of the storm
DEMETER/IDP SACC/ICARE comparison
15
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
A pattern that is often observed
during individual storms: At low
L, the decay time decreases with
increasing energy, while at high L
this pattern is inversed.
Meredith et al, Energetic outer zone electron loss
timescales during low geomagnetic activity. JGR
(2006)
3<L<5, T(E
high
) >T (E
low
), for <15
Decay time of electron fluxes (T) as a function of position and energy
Lyons et al, Pitch-angle diffusion of radiation belt
electrons within the plasmasphere. JGR (1972)
T=min at around L =3Re (theory)
16
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
Meredith et al, Evidence for acceleration of outer zone
electrons to relativistic energies by whistler mode chorus.
Annales Geophysicae (2002)
(Benck et al, Study of correlations between waves and particle fluxes measured on board the
DEMETER satellite, Advances in Space research (2008)
Cases where the electron flux increases continuously
o (wave activity) ?
17
Identified Parameters
Steady state u
st
Storm occurence and related probabilities
Dst
prev
, Dst
k
(1224 storms!)

t (time interval between two storms)
Solar Cycle parameter (SSN)
Flux variations during storm time
Type of storm (presently 2 types)
o (elapsed time between storm max (Dst
min
) and maximum flux)
Maximum Flux and Flux enhancement AF
T (Decay time)

Solar parameters data: Courtesy of GSFC Space Physics Data Facility
http://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/index.html
SAMPEX DATA: Courtesy of SAMPEX Data Center http://www.srl.caltech.edu/sampex/DataCenter/
SAC-C Data: Courtesy of CNES/DCT/AQ/EC Section, ONERA/DESP and CONAE
Sunspot Number Data: Courtesy of Solar Influences Data Analysis Center SIDC, Belgium
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Decay times Conclusion
L. Mazzino et al, Development of a statistical dynamic radiation belt model: Analysis of storm time
particle flux variations, ESA Ionizing Radiation Detection and Data Exploitation Workshop
proceedings, 2008
18
19
Example of geomagnetic storm
Storm Sudden
commencement
Main phase
Strength of storm:
Minimum Dst reached
Recovery phase
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary
20
steady state background i.e. mapping
of quiet time fluxes
Statistical dynamic radiation belt model
Geomagnetic storm (GS) prediction
(Dst<-50 nT) - Occurrence probability

Flux variation associated to GS, as a
function of energy, position and type
of storm

Flux decay time as a function of
energy, position, ...
+
Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times Introduction
L. Mazzino et al, Development of a statistical dynamic radiation belt model: Analysis of storm time particle flux variations,
ESA Ionizing Radiation Detection and Data Exploitation Workshop proceedings, 2008
21
Dst data (black) with filtered data (red): The second graph shows the filter detail, and the fourth shows a
closed up of the event, with actual amplitude of the storm in green.
Butterworth filter:
z = cutoff frequency
( )
n
z
filter
* 2
1
1
e +
=
(Dst Data: Courtesy of World Data Center for Geomagnetism, Kyoto)
Dst
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary Additional
22
Correlation between number of storms per month for
different phases in a solar cycle with the Sunspot
Maximum corresponding to that cycle.
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
Sunspot Number
Maxima
(smoothed)
Solar cycle #20: 109
Solar Cycle #21: 159
Solar Cycle #22: 157
Solar Cycle #23: 121
23
Histogram of Dst
k
vs. Dst
prev

number of bins = 100
Introducton RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary
Probability of having a storm with intensity Dst
k

considering that the previous one was of intensity Dst
prev
All Dst
min
given in absolute value
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
24
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Result Summary
For few events the time interval
between storms is greater than
100 days, and the time interval
between those storms can be
used to find the steady state.
All Dst
min
given in absolute value
Histogram of Dst
k
vs. time interval, number
of bins = 100
Nice agreement with: Tsubouchi and
Omura, Long-term occurrence
probabilities of intense geomagnetic
storm events, Space Weather, 2007
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
Probability of having a storm with intensity Dst
k
considering a
given time interval elapsed since the previous storm

25
Sunspot number maximum is a good parameter to
represent solar cycle activity vs. total number of storms.
The total number of storms per
month in a cycle correlates directly
to the severity of the solar cycle:
For solar cycles with higher SSN
maxima, SC 21 and SC 22,the total
number of storms is higher than for
SC 20 and SC 23 with lower
maxima
Solar Parameter (S): Sun Spot Number
Sunspot Number
Maxima
(smoothed)
Solar cycle #20: 109
Solar Cycle #21: 159
Solar Cycle #22: 157
Solar Cycle #23: 121
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
26
Histogram of smoothed Sunspot number vs. Time
interval between storms (number of bins = 25 time
resolution = 10 days)
The distribution of time
interval between storms for
all 1204 storms in the last 50
years seems to be Poisson-
distributed.
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
Probability of having a certain time interval between storms
considering the sunspot number

27 27
Difference of time interval distribution function depending on phase and severity of solar cycle activity
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary Additional
28
DEMETER
Fluxes
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary Additional
Geomagnetic storm: particle flux enhancement
29
(SAC-C Data: Courtesy of CNES/DCT/AQ/EC Section, ONERA/DESP and CONAE)
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary Additional
30
FLUX ENHANCEMENT DUE TO GEOMAGNETIC STOMS
SAC-C
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary
31
Resultant flux enhancement difference as a
function of storm severity, corresponding to
isolated CMEs (yellow), CIRs (red), and
mixed non isolated storms (blue)
Resultant maximum flux as a function of storm
severity, corresponding to isolated CMEs
(yellow), CIRs (red), and mixed non isolated
storms (blue)
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary Additional
Results: Fluxes
32
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary Additional
(SAC-C Data: Courtesy of CNES/DCT/AQ/EC Section, ONERA/DESP and CONAE)
TYPE 1(yellow), TYPE 2 (red)
33 33
Introduction RABEM Model Data and parameters Results Summary Additional
TYPE 2
34
Introduction Steady state GS pobabilities Flux variations Conclusion Decay times
Decay time of electron fluxes (T) independent of Dst
35
In a dipole:
We need a reference invariable
with time
Hess (1968)
McIlwain (1961-1966)
Magnetic Coordinates:
Illustration from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-shell

36
CIRs: Corotating Interaction Regions
Hundhausen, 1972
Akasofu and Hakamada, 1983
MHD simulation of (1) high speed streams which cause the
development of CIR structure and (2) the propagation of
transient shocks which also modify the CIR structure
(bottom two panels particularly)
Schematic illustration of a fast stream
interacting with a slow stream
37
CMEs: Coronal Mass Ejection
Space Weather Laboratory, George Madison University
Schematic of a coronal mass ejection
in the form of a magnetic cloud with a shock.
Cravens, 1997