Andrew.dimmock: /* Mini GEM 2018 */

2019-03-20T16:15:19Z

Mini GEM 2018

Andrew.dimmock: /* Session Summaries */

2019-03-20T16:14:36Z

Session Summaries

Andrew.dimmock: /* Dayside transients - local vs global effects on the magnetopause */

2019-03-20T16:14:12Z

Dayside transients - local vs global effects on the magnetopause

Andrew.dimmock at 16:13, 20 March 2019

2019-03-20T16:13:42Z

Andrew.dimmock: New page: Mini GEM

2019-03-20T16:02:04Z

New page: Mini GEM

New page

Mini GEM

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ===Mini GEM 2018===
-The 2018 Mini GEM was held on December 9 2018
+The 2018 Mini GEM was held on December 9th, 2018 at the Hilton Alexandria Old Town in Alexandria, Virginia
 == Session 1 GEM challenge event ==

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 The 2018 Mini GEM was held on December 9 2018
-=== Session Summaries ===
 == Session 1 GEM challenge event ==

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 - The FTE presence and properties should be checked in the model.
-== Dayside transients - local vs global effects on the magnetopause ==
+== Session 2: Dayside transients - local vs global effects on the magnetopause ==
 === Scheduled presentations ===

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:13, 20 March 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Mini GEM	+	===Mini GEM 2018===
		+
		+	The 2018 Mini GEM was held on December 9 2018
		+
		+	=== Session Summaries ===
		+
		+	== Session 1 GEM challenge event ==
		+
		+	=== Scheduled presentations ===
		+
		+	Sarah Vines: Sarah talked about the location of the magnetopause given by the Shue model
		+	and the configuration of the X-line given by Trattner’s maximum shear angle model. Both
		+	models are based on solar wind input and the results are consistent with spacecraft
		+	measurements. Sarah also talked about the magnetopause motion, thickness, current density,
		+	shear angle, and the difference in plasma beta across the magnetopause. She identified the
		+	presence of cold ions and calculated the power spectra of the magnetosheath magnetic field.
		+
		+	Yuxi Chen: Yuxi compared properties of the magnetopause and the magnetosheath of
		+	MHD-EPIC, Hall MHD, and ideal MHD. These models provide similar magnetopause location
		+	and X-line extent, and reconnection jet speeds. But the Hall MHD model produces more
		+	structures/variability at the magnetopause than the MHD-EPIC.
		+
		+	Jeff Broll: Jeff discussed a way to identify LMN coordinates through performing MVAB and
		+	MDDB in an unsupervised manner.
		+
		+	Marcos Silveira: Marcos investigated whether the transients seen by MMS spacecraft during
		+	the magnetopause crossing are FTEs. He exemplified classic FTE signatures in aspects of
		+	magnetic field and particle properties and found that none of the seen transients fit into classic
		+	FTEs.
		+
		+	=== Open discussion ===
		+
		+	Yu Lin: Yu showed global hybrid simulations from ANGIE3D.
		+
		+	Naritoshi kitamura: Naritoshi presented the dependence of the statistical location of X-line on
		+	dipole tilt (seasons) and IMF Bx. He found that the X-line location can shift by a few Re in the
		+	north-south direction as seasons and IMF Bx change. The challenge event, however, has a
		+	smaller displacement from the equatorial plane than what the dependence suggests.
		+
		+	'''Discussion topics'''
		+
		+	- Quantitative metrics are needed to perform model/model and model/data comparisons
		+	and specific entropy could be used as a metric.
		+
		+	- Coordination is needed between modellers and observers to complete challenge event
		+	studies.
		+
		+	- For power spectra, it will be more useful to compute the spectral slope rather than
		+	comparing the spectra.
		+
		+	- The FTE presence and properties should be checked in the model.
		+
		+	== Dayside transients - local vs global effects on the magnetopause ==
		+
		+	=== Scheduled presentations ===
		+
		+	David Sibeck: David reviewed the impacts of hot flow anomaly (HFA). HFA produces pressure
		+	variations in the magnetosheath, traveling magnetopause waves, and traveling convection
		+	vortices in the ionosphere. In a fortuitous conjunction events, HFA causes a “bulge” of the
		+	magnetopause that is 10-20 Re long in the north-south direction, 2-4 Re in the east-west
		+	direction, and 1-9 Re in the sunward direction.
		+
		+	Martin Archer: Martin presented two major impacts of high speed jets. One is compressing the
		+	current sheet and triggering magnetic reconnection. One is creating indentation of the
		+	magnetopause. As magnetopause rebounds, a surface wave forms. He notes that the time
		+	scale of indentation/rebounding might be controlled by collective properties of HSJ or
		+	eigenvalues of the magnetopause surface waves. He presents one event where HSJ have a
		+	broad power spectrum in frequency while the magnetopause motion and ULF waves have a
		+	narrow spectrum.
		+
		+	Xochitl Blanco-Cano: Xochitl discussed how cavitons and spontaneous hot flow anomalies
		+	(SHFAs) can modify the bow shock, magnetosheath and possibly the magnetopause. Vlasiator
		+	simulations have shown that the arrival of SHFAs can cause shock weakening and the
		+	formation of magnetosheath cavities. More work is needed to understand if SHFAs can cause
		+	waves at the magnetopause similar to the ones produced by HFAs.
		+
		+	=== Open discussion ===
		+
		+	Katarina Nykyri: Katariina presented one event where HSJs likely drive a substorm. This
		+	implies that localized transients (though there might be many in quantity) can have global effect.
		+
		+	'''Discussion topics'''
		+
		+	- Does the transient size control the size of response?
		+
		+	- How do we differentiate between direct and seeding response.

2018 Mini GEM, Washington DC - Revision history

Andrew.dimmock: /* Mini GEM 2018 */

Andrew.dimmock: /* Session Summaries */

Andrew.dimmock: /* Dayside transients - local vs global effects on the magnetopause */

Andrew.dimmock at 16:13, 20 March 2019

Andrew.dimmock: New page: Mini GEM