Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T19:52:38.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prediction of solar activity cycles by assimilating sunspot data into a dynamo model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2010

Irina N. Kitiashvili  and
Alexander G. Kosovichev
Irina N. Kitiashvili
Affiliation:
Center for Turbulence Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA email: [email protected] NORDITA, Dept. of Astronomy, AlbaNova University Center, SE 10691 Stockholm, Sweden
Alexander G. Kosovichev
Affiliation:
Hansen Experimental Physics Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA email: [email protected] NORDITA, Dept. of Astronomy, AlbaNova University Center, SE 10691 Stockholm, Sweden
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Solar activity is a determining factor for space climate of the Solar system. Thus, predicting the magnetic activity of the Sun is very important. However, our incomplete knowledge about the dynamo processes of generation and transport of magnetic fields inside Sun does not allow us to make an accurate forecast. For predicting the solar cycle properties use the Ensemble Kalman Filter (EnKF) to assimilate the sunspot data into a simple dynamo model. This method takes into account uncertainties of both the dynamo model and the observed sunspot number series. The method has been tested by calculating predictions of the past cycles using the observed annual sunspot numbers only until the start of these cycles, and showed a reasonable agreement between the predicted and actual data. After this, we have calculated a prediction for the upcoming solar cycle 24, and found that it will be approximately 30% weaker than the previous one, confirming some previous expectations. In addition, we have investigated the properties of the dynamo model during the solar minima, and their relationship to the strength of the following solar cycles. The results show that prior the weak cycles, 20 and 23, and the upcoming cycle, 24, the vector-potential of the poloidal component of magnetic field and the magnetic helicity substantial decrease. The decrease of the poloidal field corresponds to the well-known correlation between the polar magnetic field strength at the minimum and the sunspot number at the maximum. However, the correlation between the magnetic helicity and the future cycle strength is new, and should be further investigated.

Keywords

Sun: activitysunspotsmethods: data analysis
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 5 , Symposium S264: Solar and Stellar Variability: Impact on Earth and Planets , August 2009 , pp. 202 - 209
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2010

References

Bracewell, R. N. 1953, Nature, 171, 649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracewell, R. N. 1988, Mon. Not. R. Astr. Soc., 230, 535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandenburg, A. & Subramanian, K. 2005, Physics Reports, 417, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evensen, G. 2007, Data assimilation. The Ensemble Kalman Filter (Springer, Germany 2007).Google Scholar
Kalman, R. E. 1960, J. Basic Engineering, 82 (series D), 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitiashvili, I. N. & Kosovichev, A. G. 2008, ApJ (Letters), 688, L49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitiashvili, I. N. & Kosovichev, A. G. 2009, Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn., 103, 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleeorin, N., Kuzanyan, K., Moss, D., Rogachevskii, I., Sokoloff, D., & Zhang, H.Astron. Astrophys., 409, 1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleeorin, N., Rogachevskii, I., & Ruzmaikin, A. 1995, A&A, 297, 159.Google Scholar
Kleeorin, N. & Ruzmaikin, A. 1982, Magnetohydrodynamics, 18, 116 (in russian).Google Scholar
Miyahara, H., Yokoyama, Yu, & Yamaguchi, Ya. T. 2010, this Proceedings.Google Scholar
Parker, E. N. 1955, ApJ, 122, 293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesnell, W. D. 2008, Solar Physics, 252, 209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pouquet, A., Frisch, U., & Léorat, J. 1976, J. Fluid Mech., 77, 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatten, K. 2005, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, 21106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokoloff, D. 2007, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, 49, B447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svalgaard, L., Cliver, E. W., & Kamide, Y. 2005, in: Large-scale Structures and their Role in Solar Activity, ASP Conf. Ser., Vol. 346, Sankarasubramanian, K., Penn, M., and Pevtsov, A.. eds, p. 401.Google Scholar