Space Weather Sub-Group Meeting 2023-12-07

Agenda

1. Action items
2. Next meeting
3. AOB (any other business)

Notes

Meeting started at 1200 UTC. Beforehand, T. Nagatsuma provided a Power Point presentation with the agenda.

1. Action items:

1. Propose wording on Work Plan to define GSICS deliverables. Hugh Evans not present. Report deferred to next meeting.

2. Propose method of near-real time and archival inter-calibration. Piers Jiggens gave presentation (PowerPoint file 'GSICSprocessAction' distributed by Nagatsuma-san after the meeting)

• Near-real time does not work for our domain.
• Main input is PRBEM document on 'Standard Data Analysis' (v1.2 by Bourdarie et al.) https://prbem.github.io/documents/Standard_Data_Analysis.pdf
• The response functions of all instruments must be well known
• Processes for sanitizing electron and proton data
• 'Gold standard' data sets - this subgroup needs to review and agree to current gold standards.
• Conjunctions for cross calibration
• Harmonize data levels

Discussion of Piers' presentation:

Manik Bali: are the gold standard date listed on chart 8 public?

GSICS product vs. GSICS deliverables. Existing 'gold standard' products could be GSICS deliverable.

Four acceptance criteria for GSICS deliverables [from a chart Manik showed]:

1. Objective of the deliverable - e.g., why the group/subgroup community needs it. (Some GSICS agencies need to use reference LEO L1 subset for their GEO-LEO collocation to generate GSICS inter-calibration products)

2. How it was created (Data provider (e.g., IASI L1C by EUMETSAT) creates and makes it available on the GSICS Collaboration Server based on users' requests)

3. How to use it (To use the file as an input of inter-calibration of ATBD)

4. References: publications, websites, etc.

Ingmar Sandberg responded to the definition of conjunctions for cross calibration based on his group's experiences. Arase can be used to cross-calibrate GEO, GTO and LEO, and the Arase instrument spectral responses generally are peaked within the desired energy range. See his presentation from the meeting in College Park (27 Feb - 03 March 2023): http://gsics.atmos.umd.edu/pub/Development/Gsicsannualmeeting2023/4c_GSICS_SW_Sandberg_2023.pdf

Action: Compare and discuss different cross-calibration methods used by different institutions and compare them to PRBEM Standard Data Analysis Procedure.

Other action items, not discussed:

3. Provide definitions of data levels in each organization. ESA and NOAA have provided theirs.

4. Propose an application produced from multiple satellite data.

2. Next meeting:

GSICS Annual Meeting, 11-15 March 2024 at EUMETSAT in Darmstadt

Space weather (SW) meeting is on day 2, 12 March, four hours long

There is also the cross-cutting meeting in the morning of the fifth day, in which a summary of each session is presented.

The SW meeting is open to participation outside of GSICS subgroup members, by invitation.

Action: Provide names of people to invite to the SW subgroup meeting in Darmstadt.

Manik Bali: there will also be presentations from 'new space'. Some have SW instruments on their satellites. Consider inviting.

Jim Spann: is this being broadcast widely? Are we encouraged to seek outside participation?

Manik Bali: We invite from outside GSICS every year, statistically we get 1-2 responses. It is up to your subgroup how much outside participation you wish to have.

Action: Next month, discuss and agree to an agenda for the SW subgroup meeting in Darmstadt.

Try for two subgroup meetings before the Darmstadt meeting.

Next subgroup meeting is scheduled for January 18 at 12 UTC.

3.Any other business:

Piers Jiggens: concerned where we go from here. Worry that we do not have buy-in from members not in attendance at today's meeting. Need to start working on some of these items after the Darmstadt meeting.

Ingmar Sandberg: decide on methodology and whether use same, shared code or individual implementations of the same methodology. The latter approach is risky. Use PRBEM gitlab for shared code?

Piers followed up in an email with the following proposal for the next subgroup meeting:

Can we make a decision point on these at the next meeting?

1/ Decide on methodology for this group (e.g. to adopt PRBEM)

2/ Include discussion on common code base, can we expand PRBEM gitlab in this direction? links us to COSPAR?

Meeting lasted 1.5 hours.

Attendees

Chair: Tsutomu Nagatsuma (NICT)

CMA: Cong Huang

ESA: Piers Jiggens

NOAA: Manik Bali, Athanasions Boudouridis, Juan Rodriguez, Jim Spann

SPARC: Ingmar Sandberg