Empirical orthogonal function analysis of magnetic observatory data: Further evidence for non-axisymmetric magnetospheric sources for satellite induction studies

Geophysical Research Letters

Volumn 33, Issue 11, 2006, Pages

  Balasis, Georgios ^a   Egbert, Gary D ^b  

^a GFZ GERMAN RESEARCH CENTRE FOR GEOSCIENCES   (Germany)

^b OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FUNCTION EVALUATION; IONOSPHERE; OBSERVATORIES; SATELLITES; TRANSFER FUNCTIONS;

MAGNETOSPHERIC RING CURRENT SOURCE; NONZONAL LOW-FREQUENCY SOURCE FIELDS; ORTHOGONAL FUNCTION METHODS; SATELLITE ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTION; SPATIAL MODE OF VARIABILITY;

MAGNETOSPHERE;

ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; GEOMAGNETIC FIELD; GEOMAGNETISM; IONOSPHERE; MAGNETOSPHERE; NUMERICAL MODEL; SATELLITE IMAGERY; TEMPORAL VARIATION;

EID: 33746448739     PISSN: 00948276     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2006GL025721     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Balasis, G., G. D. Egbert, and S. Maus (2004), Local time effects in satellite estimates of electromagnetic induction transfer functions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L16610, doi:10.1029/2004GL020147.
2. Banks, R. J. (1969), Geomagnetic variations and the conductivity of the upper mantle, Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 17, 457-487.
3. Constable, S., and C. Constable (2004), Observing geomagnetic induction in magnetic satellite measurements and associated implications for mantle conductivity, Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst., 5, Q01006, doi:10.1029/ 2003GC000634.
4. Daglis, I. A., and J. U. Kozyra (2002), Outstanding issues of ring current dynamics, J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys., 64, 253-264.
5. Daglis, I. A., J. U. Kozyra, Y. Kamide, D. Vassiliadis, A. S. Sharma, M. W. Liemohn, W. D. Gonzalez, B. T. Tsurutani, and G. Lu (2003), Intense space storms: Critical issues and open disputes, J. Geophys. Res., 108(A5), 1208, doi:10.1029/2002JA009722.
6. Fujii, I., and A. Schultz (2002), The 3D electromagnetic response of the Earth to ring current and auroral oval excitation, Geophys. J. Int., 151, 689-709.
7. Jorgensen, A. M., H. E. Spence, W. J. Hughes, and H. J. Singer (2004), A statistical study of the global structure of the ring current, J. Geophys. Res., 109, A12204, doi:10.1029/2003JA010090.
8. Kleinbaum, D. G., and L. L. Kupper (1978), Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods, Duxbury, Pacific Grove, Calif.
9. Le, G., C. T. Russell, and K. Takahashi (2004), Morphology of the ring current derived from magnetic field observations, Ann. Geophys., 22, 1267-1295.
10. Martinec, Z., and H. McCreadie (2004), Electromagnetic induction modelling based on satellite magnetic vector data, Geophys. J. Int., 157, 1045-1060.
11. Olsen, N. (1998), The electrical conductivity of the mantle beneath Europe derived from C-responses from 3 to 720 hr, Geophys. J. Int., 133, 298-308.
12. Olsen, N. (1999), Induction studies with satellite data, Surv. Geophys., 20, 309-340.
13. Preisendorfer, R. W. (1988), Principal Component Analysis in Meteorology and Oceanography, 425 pp., Elsevier, New York.
14. Sabaka, T. J., N. Olsen, and M. E. Purucker (2004), Extending comprehensive models of the Earth's magnetic field with Oersted and CHAMP data, Geophys. J. Int., 159, 521-547.
15. Schultz A., and J. C. Larsen (1990), On the electrical conductivity of the mid-mantle, II, Delineation of heterogeneity by application of extremal inverse solutions, Geophys. J. Int., 101, 565-580.
16. Tsyganenko, N. A. (2002), A model of the near magnetosphere with a dawn-dusk asymmetry 2. Parameterization and fitting to observations, J. Geophys. Res., 107(A8), 1176, doi:10.1029/2001JA000220.