2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.asr.2008.08.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the IRI model for the European region

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Bertoni et al (2006) used foF2 and hmF2 measured by two digital ionosondes installed at two Brazilian low-latitude stations in July 2003, October 2003, January 2004, and April 2004 IRI-2007IRI- during low (1987 and high (1990) solar activity, and undisturbed conditions for four different seasons. In Europe, Maltseva and Poltavsky (2009) investigated several aspects of the IRI accuracy and efficiency for long term prediction of the foF2 and the maximum usable frequencies (MUF) using the stormtime correction option, TEC, and the maximum observable frequency (MOF) for the year 2005. In China, Zhao et al (2017) used hmF2 data derived by ionosondes at Mohe, Beijing, Wuhan and Sanya ranging from year 2007 to 2016 to assess the performance of the three options for the IRI-hmF2, while Liu et al (2019) Data used in this work were collected in geomagnetic quiet days (∑ Kp ≤ 24, where ∑ Kp is the sum of the eight 3-h Kp indices for the day) from September 2017 to August 2018.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bertoni et al (2006) used foF2 and hmF2 measured by two digital ionosondes installed at two Brazilian low-latitude stations in July 2003, October 2003, January 2004, and April 2004 IRI-2007IRI- during low (1987 and high (1990) solar activity, and undisturbed conditions for four different seasons. In Europe, Maltseva and Poltavsky (2009) investigated several aspects of the IRI accuracy and efficiency for long term prediction of the foF2 and the maximum usable frequencies (MUF) using the stormtime correction option, TEC, and the maximum observable frequency (MOF) for the year 2005. In China, Zhao et al (2017) used hmF2 data derived by ionosondes at Mohe, Beijing, Wuhan and Sanya ranging from year 2007 to 2016 to assess the performance of the three options for the IRI-hmF2, while Liu et al (2019) Data used in this work were collected in geomagnetic quiet days (∑ Kp ≤ 24, where ∑ Kp is the sum of the eight 3-h Kp indices for the day) from September 2017 to August 2018.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, a series of statistical analyses have been carried out to assess the accuracy of MUF prediction models. For example, Maltseva and Poltavsky have investigated the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) performance in the European area and evaluated MUF accuracy and efficiency [19]. A validation of different international high frequency (HF) prediction models for HF communication in plain, mountainous, and sea regions of Pakistan has been performed, and the ionospheric parameters have been calculated using Ionospheric Communications Enhanced Profile Analysis & Circuit (ICEPAC) [20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%