TY - JOUR
T1 - Shape of the low-latitude magnetopause
T2 - Comparison of models
AU - Shue, J. H.
AU - Russell, C. T.
AU - Song, P.
N1 - Funding Information:
This researchw as supported by the Center of Excellence (COE) program of Ministry of Education, Science, Culture, and Sports of Japan. The work at UCLA was supported by NASA under grant NAGW-3948 and by NSF under grant ATM 94-13081.T he work at the University of Michigan was supported by NSF/ONR under grant ATM-9713492. We thank D. H. Fairfield of NASA/GSFC, H. Kawano of hyushu University and G. Zastenkero f IKI for valuable commentso n the tables.
PY - 2000
Y1 - 2000
N2 - The location and shape of the magnetopause are among the important parameters in space physics because they specify the size of the magnetosphere and respond to the physical processes occurring therein. In the past few years, several empirical models of the magnetopause shape have been developed using large in situ data sets of magnetopause crossings. These models were derived from best-fits to observed magnetopause locations; however, the data sets, the functional forms of the magnetopause, and the specific dependence of the shape on the upstream solar wind conditions used by these models are different, so are their ranges of validity. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive review of these models, compare the differences among them, and discuss their limitations. In addition, we also show the results of validation of these models for space weather forecasts using the January 1997 magnetic cloud event.
AB - The location and shape of the magnetopause are among the important parameters in space physics because they specify the size of the magnetosphere and respond to the physical processes occurring therein. In the past few years, several empirical models of the magnetopause shape have been developed using large in situ data sets of magnetopause crossings. These models were derived from best-fits to observed magnetopause locations; however, the data sets, the functional forms of the magnetopause, and the specific dependence of the shape on the upstream solar wind conditions used by these models are different, so are their ranges of validity. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive review of these models, compare the differences among them, and discuss their limitations. In addition, we also show the results of validation of these models for space weather forecasts using the January 1997 magnetic cloud event.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0000685051&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0273-1177(99)00658-4
DO - 10.1016/S0273-1177(99)00658-4
M3 - 期刊論文
AN - SCOPUS:0000685051
SN - 0273-1177
VL - 25
SP - 1471
EP - 1484
JO - Advances in Space Research
JF - Advances in Space Research
IS - 7-8
ER -