4.2 Review

Modeling of the cold electron plasma density for radiation belt physics

Journal

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fspas.2023.1096595

Keywords

electron density; plasmasphere; plasmapause; empirical models; physical models; machine learning; radiation belts

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This review specifically focuses on the existing plasma density models, covering ionospheric source models, empirical density models, physics-based and machine-learning density models. The review is put into the context of radiation belt physics and space weather codes. It is limited to the most commonly used models or those recently developed and showing promise. A wide range of conditions are considered, such as magnetic local time variation, geomagnetic conditions, ionospheric source regions, radial and latitudinal dependence, and collisional vs. collisionless conditions. These models can be used to complement satellite observations of electron plasma density when data are lacking, they are commonly used in radiation belt physics simulations, and can enhance our understanding of plasmasphere dynamics.
This review focusses strictly on existing plasma density models, including ionospheric source models, empirical density models, physics-based and machine-learning density models. This review is framed in the context of radiation belt physics and space weather codes. The review is limited to the most commonly used models or to models recently developed and promising. A great variety of conditions is considered such as the magnetic local time variation, geomagnetic conditions, ionospheric source regions, radial and latitudinal dependence, and collisional vs. collisionless conditions. These models can serve to complement satellite observations of the electron plasma density when data are lacking, are for most of them commonly used in radiation belt physics simulations, and can improve our understanding of the plasmasphere dynamics.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available