FISM 2.0: Improved spectral range, resolution, and accuracy Phillip C. Chamberlin NASA/GSFC
Outline • FISM Version 1.0 • New in FISM Version 2.0 – Improvements in range, resolution, and accuracy – New data sets, new flare variably • FISM 2.0 Results – Daily model – Flare model • Gradual Phase Modeling • Impulsive Phase Modeling
FISM 1.0 E(t UTC ) E min E SC (t d ) E SR (t d ) E GP (t UTC ) E IP (t UTC ) E min : Solar minimum reference spectrum, FISMref, (Constant) Daily Component Variations (Modeled on a daily basis): - Solar Cycle (SC) - linear with 108-day smoothed daily proxy - Solar Rotation (SR) - linear with (daily proxy - SC proxy) Flare Component Variations (Modeled on a 60 seconds basis): - Gradual Phase (GP) - Power Law with GOES 0.1-0.8 nm - Impulsive Phase (IP) - Power Law with d/dt GOES (Neupert Effect) Center-to-Limb variations accounted for by representative proxies in daily component but must be corrected for in flare components
FISM 1.0 • Released in 2005, the first version of FISM has contributed to many studies on the influence of solar variations on Earth, Mars, and the Moon. – 1 nm bins, 0.1-190 nm – 5-20% uncertainties for daily model – 20-75% uncertainties for flare model
FISM Available Through LISIRD
FISM 1.0 Data Sets • FISM 1.0 ‘daily’ is based on Level 3 data from TIMED SEE (EGS and XPS) as well as UARS SOLSTICE • FISM 1.0 ‘flare’ uses TIMED SEE (Level 1 and 3A EGS and Level 3A XPS) for flare data Daily Model: L3 XPS L3 EGS UARS SOLSTICE Flare Model: L3A XPS L1/3A EGS
FISM 2.0 Data Sets • FISM 2.0 ‘daily’ will be based on L4 XPS, L3 data from SDO/EVE/MEGS, and UARS (and SORCE?) SOLSTICE • FISM 2.0 ‘flare’ uses L4 XPS, L2 SDO/EVE/MEGS, L1 and L3A TIMED/SEE/EGS – and possibly UARS/SORCE SOLSTICE? ** L3 TIMED/SEE * L4 XPS (0.1-6 nm), ESP? Daily Model: * L3 SDO/EVE/MEGS (0.1nm) ** UARS/SORCE SOLSTICE Flare Model: ?UARS/SORCE SOLSTICE? * L2 SDO/EVE/MEGS (0.1nm) ** L1/L3 TIMED/SEE/EGS
FISM 2.0 Improvements • Higher spectral bins at all wavelengths – 0.1 nm vs 1.0 nm (FISM 2.0 vs 1.0) • More accurate flare measurements (EUV only) – 10-15% vs 20-40% • Number of flare measurements (EUV ONLY) – 389 vs 39 • Not only the number of flares observed, but at every 10 seconds throughout the flare • More available as SDO continues to observe • Range of flare magnitudes measured – C5 to X6.9 vs M1 to X28+
FISM 2.0 New Questions • How to implement delay in flare response due to cooling? • How to implement coronal dimming? • How to model flare variations in FUV long-ward of EVE – Use FISM 1.0? New SOLSTICE Model? SDO EVE measurements showing EUV emissions of various temperatures peak at different times during solar flares.
FISM 2.0 Daily Results (test) • FISM daily results based on SDO EVE show promising first results. Near Solar Maximum Red: FISM Solar Minimum Black: SDO/EVE
FISM 2.0 Daily Results (test) • FISM daily results based on SDO EVE show promising first results. Red: FISM Black: SDO/EVE
FISM 2.0 Daily Results • MEGS-B range is not coming out correctly – Need to make sure EVE L3 data is correct (as is the case for 30.34 nm data) • Improve proxy tree? – Now based on best statistics determine best proxy • Multiple proxies and weighted fits for each bin? • Add in XPS and SOLSTICE – Algorithms only completed so far for SDO/EVE – UARS SOLSTICE already part of FISM V1.0, just need to merge • Lots of validation still needed
FISM 2.0 Flare Results • Initial results show some good results • May still have some large uncertainties due to trying to generalize/model a wide variety of flares • First run still just uses the Impulsive Phase (IP) and Gradual Phase (GP) Peak values, not the entire flare • Now able to model center-to-limb variation (CLV) for IP as well as GP (didn’t have enough IP observations prior to EVE). • Initial results for a generalize flare timing delay look ok, but hopefully a better way.
FISM 2.0 Flare GP Fits • Good fits to those wavelengths that have large variations 17.11 nm Fe IX 11.44 nm Fe XXII
FISM 2.0 GP Peak Delay Time • Median peak delay time for each wavelength shows some potentially useful results, but need validation and hopefully another method/proxy
FISM 2.0 Flare IP Fits • Good fits to those wavelengths that have large variations – and valid center-to-limb darkening 30.38 He II
FISM 2.0 Flare Results BLACK: SDO/EVE Light Blue: FISM Daily Green: FISM IP Dark Blue: FISM GP RED: FISM All (Daily+IP+GP)
Conclusions (1) • Initial modeling of SDO/EVE is going well, but still a lot of work and validation activities remain. – Find another proxy (XRS A/B temperature) for peak delay – student working on this now. – Coronal dimming? • Will then add on soft X-rays from XPS Level 4 and SOLSTICE from 116 nm – ??? – Extend wavelength range to cover FUV hole that will exist after SORCE, at least for daily model (maybe just use another daily model then?) • Compare V1.0 to V2.0, to other models, as well as to the various basis data sets, and to I/T modelers. • Integrate V2.0 to LISIRD for distribution
Conclusions (2) • Lots of new, planned science using FISM: – One example will be in poster session from Huang et al. – MAVEN LPW/EUV – Moore et al. paper, in preparation, follow on the Woods et al., 2005 paper on TIM measurements of flares • Use FISM to model the IP and GP radiated flare emission in TSI – Emslie et al. paper, submitted, SEE energetics comparison of 38 events
Recommend
More recommend
