1. Department of physics, St. Xavier’s College, Maitighar, Kathmandud, Nepal.
2. Department of physics, St. Xavier’s College, Maitighar, Kathmandud, Nepal.
3. Department of physics, St. Xavier’s College, Maitighar, Kathmandud, Nepal.
4. Department of physics, St. Xavier’s College, Maitighar, Kathmandud, Nepal.
5. Department of physics, St. Xavier’s College, Maitighar, Kathmandud, Nepal.

*             Correspondence: binod.guragain2016@gmail.com

Keywords: solar wind density, geomagnetic, disturbances

1. INTRODUCTION

The term geomagnetic storm was first used to describe the magnetosphere and ionosphere disturbances intermittently occurring [1]. Later it was showed that the solar wind is continuously emitted, and that its interaction with the geomagnetic field forms the magnetosphere. During these storms, the whole current system of the magnetosphere and ionosphere is intensified, leading, consequently, to changes in the geomagnetic field measured in the earth’s surface [2]. In the magnetosphere, during geomagnetic storms, several plasma regions are affected and suffer strong modifications. Such changes are associated with intensifications in the current systems, mainly in the equatorial ring current region, where they can cause telecommunications disturbances [3]. Also, during these periods, particle acceleration and precipitation may occur, mainly in the aurora region, leading to the aurora of- currencies. The more intense the storm, the more intense the energy of the particles involved, and more equator ward and wider the aurora. The main causes of the storm are related to the plasma and magnetic field structures in the interplanetary medium. Initially the earth’s magnetosphere is compressed when the solar wind pressure is increased. During the time of interaction between the earth’s magnetic field and solar wind magnetic field certain amount of energy is increased and this increased energy ultimately increase the plasma level in magnetosphere and also increase the movement of electric current in magnetosphere and ionosphere [4].Geomagnetic activity also creates some directly and indirectly effect and among those some are health problems, satellite malfunction, weather changes etc. Similarly, auroras are produced when the solar wind extremely disturb the magnetosphere and the trajectories of charged particles in both solar wind and magnetosphere plasma, mainly in the form of electrons and protons precipitate them in the upper atmosphere where their energy is lost [5]. Those phenomena which occur within the magnetically heated outer atom- spheres in the sun are known to be solar phenomena, which includes solar wind, energy bursts such as solar flares, coronal mass ejection or solar eruptions, coronal heating and sunspots [6]. The sum of these all solar fluctuations is termed as solar variation and these collective effects of solar variations within sun’s gravitational field is termed as space weather. Solar minima and solar maxima are the period which falls under the solar activity. The period of least solar activity in the 11 year solar cycle of the sun is called as solar minima and during the time of solar minima sunspot and solar flare activity diminishes and some-time does not occur for several days. The solar minima can only identify after the six month of the actual occurrence of solar minima because the minimum is described by a smoothed average over 12 months of sunspot activity. The normal period of the greatest solar activity in the 11 year solar cycle of the sun is called as solar maxima [7]. All the geomagnetic disturbances occurring over short periods of time are measured by geomagnetic indices. It was found that the magnetic field measured near the earth surface varies in wide ranges. The main cause for geomagnetic field variations are the solar wind coupling with the earth’s magnetosphere and magnetosphere coupling with ionosphere [8]. Sunspots are temporary phenomena of appearance of a dark spots containing strong magnetic fields, observed on the photosphere of the sun. These areas have reduced tem-premature due to concentrations of magnetic flux field inhibiting convection. Sunspots usually appear in pairs of opposite magnetic polarity, an averaged sized sunspot is as large as Earth [9]. The Temperature of sunspots is roughly 3000 K – 4500 K compared To surrounding temperature which is about 6000K.These areas appears as a dark spot in contrast with the photosphere of the sun, which is very bright. Sunspots has two parts, the central spot which is the darkest part called umbra, where the magnetic field is approximately vertical and the surrounding penumbra, which is lighter and magnetic field is more inclined [10]. It was found that number of sunspots varies in the surface of Sun varies with a period of 11 years solar or sunspot cycle. Sunspots number represents the activity of sun, greater number of sunspot in- dictates higher solar activity and vice-versa [11]. The rotation of these sunspots can be seen on the solar surface which take about 27 days to make a complete rotation. The sunspot, evidence of strong magnetic field in the sunspot was found by Hale with the help of Zeeman splitting. Sunspot are the best exhibition of Sun’s magnetic field with field strength of a large sunspot as high as 3000G [12]. Due to this strong field the region becomes darker and compared to the sure- rounding. Sunspot are the regions of varying diameters extending up to 25,000 Km [13].The period of inordinate solar activity during 11- year solar cycle is called Solar maximum. Large number of sunspots aroused during this time frame resulting growth in the solar irradiance output by 0.07% [14]. At the time of Solar maxima the Sun’s magnetic field lines are highly distorted due to rapid rotation of magnetic field on the solar equator compared to its polar region. Erupting filament and associated Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) are the vital interplanetary structures emerging from the Sun at this phase [15].These interplanetary structures are dense which interact with magneto- sphere creating compression in it, intensification of magnetopause current and sudden change in Dust Index [16]. Solar minima is the period of minimum solar activity in the 11- Year solar cycle of the Sun. Solar flares activity and sunspot numbers get diminished during this period [17]. Coronal holes are more frequent and CMEs becomes rare during the period. Solar active regions are the source of origination for high speed solar wind which impulsively ejects materials in coronal mass ejections (CMEs).Solar winds are also originated from coronal holes where plasma is free to stream from the solar surface along with open magnetic field lines. High speed streams associating coronal holes are observed from the Earth mostly during the solar minima when these coronal holes extend to the solar equator. During solar minima interplanetary structures are not capable of producing severe storms and their geo-effect is generally moderate [18]. This section deals with important interplanetary structures responsible for geomagnetic disturbances. Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) are key for understanding the physics related to solar corona and hemispheric disturbances. CMEs also helps to explain background solar wind because they involve the injection of significant amounts of mass and energy into large volumes of the interplanetary medium. CMEs may also provide the ma- jar interrelation between geomagnetic activity and supposedly independent classes of”geoeffective” solar activity [19]. Solar Coronal Mass Ejection specifies the entire pro- chess that escorts to the ejection of mass and magnetic flux into interplanetary space. These eject can accelerate to escape speed, and in most cases there is no evidence of material falling back toward the sun, so one expects them to be observed in the interplanetary medium. Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) related with flares, prominences and disappearing filaments have been viewed by white-light coronagraphs [20]. The bright arc is thought to be outcome from the pile up of the helmet stream, which typically overlies the erupting region [21]. During first observations, the Solar corona was believed very quiet, almost static, with a very slow evolution in its appearance over the 11-years solar activity cycle .Later, with the arrival of the new technologies and the improvement on the observation techniques, the corona was identified by its very dynamic behavior, with activity occurring over a wide range of temporal and spatial scales [22]. Researchers have found CMEs are very huge and dynamic, contain more than 1015 grams of solar materials and have a radial size of 0.25 AU when they pass by the Earth which is 1AU from the Sun. The occurrence rate of CMEs relies on the phase of solar cycle and is more frequent and more intense around solar maximum [23].Interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs) are macro-scale structures that are rudimentary in shaping the hemispheric plasma, magnetic field and driving space weather disturbances. They originate from huge magnetized plasma clouds, cornel mass ejections (CMEs), which are originated from the Sun at a quasi-regular basis [24]. These eruptions were first divulged with space based optical coronagraphs in the 1970s [25]. Interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs) is the manifestations in the solar wind of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) at the Sun, are characterized by various signatures that include abnormally low plasma proton temperatures, bidirectional suprathermal electron steals (BDEs) and energetic particle flows, cosmic ray depressions and plasma compositional anomalies. Speedy ICMEs also generate shocks in the upstream solar wind [26]. ICMEs are supposed to release huge amount of energy in the solar atmosphere which can lead to significant explosion of mass from the Sun. A subset of ICMEs has simple flux rope-like magnetic fields, characterized by enhanced magnetic fields that rotate slowly through a large angle. Such “magnetic clouds” (MCs) have been the focus of intense study that includes modeling as force-free or non-force-free flux ropes [27]. Flux rope configurations may arise naturally during CME eruptions and are suggested by helical structures visible in coronagraph images of CMEs. Magnetic clouds with periods of strong southward magnetic field are also responsible for many intense geomagnetic storms [28]. Plasma compositional anomalies have also been recognized in ICMEs, including enhanced plasma helium abundances compared to protons and occasional enhancements in minor ions (in particular iron). Enhanced Fe charge states have also been reported. Such composition suggests that the plasma inside ICMEs originates in the low corona. Energetic partial signatures include bidirectional energetic protons, cosmic rays, energetic particle intensity depressions (For bush decreases), and unusual solar energetic particle (SEP) flow directions [29].

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study identified the effect on cosmic ray during geomagnetic storms recorded in middle and high latitude. Omni web is a multi-spacecraft database of near Earth magnetic field and plasma observation. Data are available in low resolution OMNI (LRO) at 1- hour,1- day and 27 – day cadence from 1963 to the near-present say whereas High Resolution OMNI (HRO) data are available at 1-minute and 5-minute resolution between 1981 and the near-present day, Data products available from OMNI web include magnetic field parameters, 3-vector IMF, Plasma parameters, velocity(3-dimensional), proton density, proton temperature, flow pressure as well as geomagnetic activity indices : Dust (1-hour cadence), Kip (3 – hour cadence), AE (1 – minute cadence), SYM-H (1 minute cadence) and proton fluxes of energy ranges 10MeV, 30 MeV and 60 MeV. The data used in this study, its detail description and how it is calculated can be found on: https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/form/omni min.html (for 1- minute and 5 – minute average) and https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/form/dx1.html (Hourly averaged, Daily averaged, 27-day averaged and Yearly averaged). Simultaneous solar wind density data has been used to correlate interplanetary magnetic field, proton density and geomagnetic indices (SYM-H / Dust Index). Geomagnetic indices (SYM-H / Dust Index) are simple measures of geomagnetic activity that occurs, typically, over periods of time of less than a few hours and which is recorded by magnetometers at ground based observations to exhibit the severity of magnetic storm. Dust index is used as correspondence parameter to explain interplanetary magnetic field and Solar wind parameters. Whereas, SYM-H is used during scatterplot correlation of geomagnetic indices with cosmic ray flux. The basic differences between the SYM-H and Dust indices is the time resolution. SYM-H is available at 1- minute resolution and Dust is available for 5 – minute time resolution. The hourly average data for Cosmic ray, magnetic field parameters, IMF, Plasma parameters, velocity, proton density, as well as geomagnetic activity indices against time were plotted individually for particular events. It used GNU plot in order to make our graphical analysis and to describe the characteristics of solar wind density with respect to the parameters selected. Correlation refers to any of a broad class of statistical relationships involving two variables and is indicated by R.

4. RESULT & DISCUSSION

Three events where IMF, Solar wind parameters and Geomagnetic Indices were analyzed; related their behavior with different solar and interplanetary parameters to have better understanding about its characteristics and possible mechanisms involved Three Events selected for the analysis during the research are analyzed accordingly. The figure below shows the variations of interplanetary and geomagnetic parameters during 8th-9th March 2012 storm where the solar wind plasma (Vsw) with initial velocity of 509.8km/s kept almost steady throughout the morning while it claimed its maximum of 800.4km/s at 11:37UT resulting the major disturbances. After a while, with sudden rise and gradual fall, it maintained to 577.3km/s. It was noticed that Vsw kept increasing throughout the day on 8th March while on 9th the same trend is followed with decreasing value at the end of the day. Vsw made its peak value of 753.1km/s on 9th March at 6:10UT while Taw got to its maximum during the night of 8th March which on keeping descending, maintained its value to 0.16 throughout the event. At 11:50 UT of the first day, Flow Pressure (PW) reached to its apogee with Corresponding value of 30.58 naps and continued falling. As the solar wind pressure is not so high enough to compress the magnetosphere, the high speed solar wind will bring the energetic solar wind plasma into the magnetosphere. Similar fashion is been followed with Solar Plasma Density (New). The bottom panel describing fluctuation of AE index with maximum value of around 2900 net at 14:01 UT corresponding to the lower value of -115 net of SYM-H. During mid-day of 8th March to till its end there was a continuous fluctuations on the components of magnetic fields(B, Box, By) corroborated by Eye ranging in between -14 to 0.5 mV/m.

Figure 01: Variations of the interplanetary and geomagnetic parameters during 8th –9th March 2012 storm

The geomagnetic parameters indicating the low values, quite period is observed with AE lying below 250 net with the range of SY M H about zero and with maximum amplitude varying between 10 to 10 note The solar wind parameters, interplanetary magnetic field and components show very weak values, replicating inert condition. During, a geomagnetic disturbance, there is an energy input inside the magnetosphere and ionosphere which changes ionosphere parameters, such as composition, temperature and circulation. But during quiet periods, measurements on the ground do not present significant disturbances. Sometimes little variations as enhancements or depletions are observed in the ionosphere parameters [30].

Figure 02: Variations of the interplanetary and geomagnetic parameters during 13-14 th January 2017 storm.

Strong solar activity started with multiple M-flares, the strongest of which was an M5.5 flare peaking on 4th September. A further X2.2 flare peaking on 6th September was followed by an X9.3 flare (as recorded by the GOES 15 satellite), peaking on September 6 (recorded as X10 by the GOES 13 satellite). The X9.3 flare was associated with strong radio bursts over a wide range of the frequency spectrum. The ICME shock effect associated to the M5.5 on 4th September produced Sudden Storm Commencements (SSC) on ground magnetic field on 6th September. There were more M flares, the strongest of M7.3 magnitude was peaking at 10:15 UT on 7 September. A further X1.3 class flare was observed to peak on 7th September at 14:36 UT. During 8th and 9th September multiple M–class flares occurred. At this time the ionosphere was already under strong influence of the ongoing strong geomagnetic storm that started on 7th September, but its main phase influenced the ionosphere starting early on 8th September with weaker continuation on 9th September. The ionosphere was again directly influenced by another X8.2–class flare which occurred at 16:06UT on 10 September with only slowly decaying X- ray fluxes till the end of the day. The maximum speed of the solar wind during the analyzed period was about 600 km/s to 820 km/s. The figure shows the variations of interplanetary and geomagnetic parameters during 7-8th September 2017 where the first geomagnetic storm started with a SSC at 11:00 UT on 7th September. The main phase of the storm started at 23:07 UT on 7th September (SSC) and the maximum phase occurred at around 01:08 UT on 8 September. The following storm reached its maximum phase at around 13:56 UT on 8th September [31]. This CME reached the Earth relatively soon, implying that, despite being fast, the interplanetary space was already preconditioned by the previous CMEs. It caught up with the preceding structure and propagated through its magnetic cloud, resulting in a strong shock followed by a highly compressed sheath region [32]. The first decrease in the SYM-H index indicates the onset of the geomagnetic storm and is associated with the arrival of the eject at 23:00 UTC with southward Be ∼ 10 note With the arrival of the southward orientated interplanetary shock (∼ 30 net), SYM-H sharply decreased again to 100 net, reaching a minimum of ∼ 150 note

Figure 03: Variations of the interplanetary and geomagnetic parameters during 7-8 th September 2017 storm.

In this subsection, correlation analysis was inspected between Solar Wind Density with IMF, Solar wind parameters and geomagnetic indices. Calculation of the correlation coefficient between them was conducted with the help of scatter plot and the line of best fit was drawn. For this study we considered all 3 geomagnetic events shortlisted similarly all the profiles were also analyzed. The correlation coefficients for different events were listed in below.

Figure 04: Best fit lines through the scatter plot of Solar Wind Density against Scalar B, Scalar By and Box, SW plasma speed, Flow pressure, Electric field, Dust- Index and AE-Index during the geomagnetic storm occurred between 8-9th March 2012

Figure 05: Best fit lines through the scatter plot of Solar Wind Density against Scalar B, Scalar By and Box, SW plasma speed, Flow pressure, Electric field.

Figure 06: Best fit lines through the scatter plot of Solar Wind Density against Scalar B, Scalar By and Bx, SW plasma speed, Flow pressure, Electric field, Dst-Index and AE-Index during the geomagnetic storm occurred between 07-08th September 2017.

Table 01: Correlation coefficient (r) between Solar Wind Density with different parameters during the geomagnetic storm occurred between 8-9 March 2012

Event 1st : 8th – 9th March 2012
Parameters	Correlation coefficient (r) between parameters and Solar Wind Density
IMF B, nT	0.30199
By, nT (GSM)	0.22045
Bx, nT (GSM)	0.41275
Solar Wind Speed, km/s	0.26671
Flow Pressure	0.92921
Electric Field	-0.38702
Dst –Index	0.68027
AE-Index	– 0.10806

Table 02: Correlation coefficient (r) between Solar Wind Density with different parameters during the geomagnetic storm occurred between 13-14 th Janauary 2017

Event 2nd : 13th – 14th January 2017
Parameters	Correlation coefficient (r) between parameters and Solar Wind Density
IMF B, nT	-0.047288
By, nT (GSM)	0.41336
Bx, nT (GSM)	0.071092
Solar Wind Speed, km/s	-0.39933
Flow Pressure	0.80812
Electric Field	-0.084766
Dst –Index	0.26951
AE-Index	0.10682

Event 3rd : 7th – 8th September 2017
Parameters	Correlation coefficient (r) between parameters and Solar Wind Density
IMF B, nT	0.31591
By, nT (GSM)	0.36245
Bx, nT (GSM)	0.12564
Solar Wind Speed, km/s	-0.17236
Flow Pressure	0.85343
Electric Field	-0.11009
Dst –Index	0.61137
AE-Index	0.10008

From the table above, with regard to the correlation coefficient, Flow Pressure and Dst-Index (both having the value¿ 0.5) contributed the most with solar wind density on carrying geomagnetic disturbances. Besides, the other parameters as like speed, components of electric and magnetic fields, pressure do not play a significant role regardless to low value. The correlation coefficient on electric field and AE index gave negative value showing no any effect on solar wind density.

5. CONCLUSION

Solar wind Velocity, Pressure, Density, Temperature, SYM-H, AE index and the various components of the electric and magnetic field which claims that during a geomagnetic disturbance, there is an energy input inside the magnetosphere and ionosphere which changes ionosphere parameters, such as composition, temperature and circulation while during quiet periods as in event 2, having low values of the parameters, significant disturbances is not seen. At the same time, the study find the correlation coefficient for various parameters with solar wind density. The data set for three particular events were taken using OMNI data explorer for each storms. Solar wind relative to various interplanetary parameters during each storm was analyzed; correlation of Solar wind density with other parameters was evaluated with the help of scatter plot and the line of best fit is drawn. The correlation of Solar wind density with the other components suggests that, Flow Pressure and Dst- Index exhibited an immense role on carrying geomagnetic disturbances. Besides, the other parameters as like speed, components of electric and magnetic fields, pressure do not play a significant role, with correlation coefficient on electric field and AE index showing negative value. The Higher solar pressure with lower density shows large disturbances due to presence of the solar and geomagnetic activities during the solar. In conclusion, during the main phase of the storm, maximum solar wind velocity was observed to be around 800km/s suggesting that the Solar wind velocity (Vsw) has strong impact for the cause of geomagnetic disturbances.

6. RECOMMENDATION

As by the term itself, thesis can be defined as a research that can be regularly carried on proving a statement with justifying data sets accompanied by some innovations. Innovations and Discoveries are always dynamic leading to a new conclusions and hence the study put forward some of the major directions that can help Physics of Space leading to a new arena and could be a pathway for the future generations, more representative and quantitative results could be obtained if large sets of events are analyzed. Varying number of parameters can be taken to understand the clear picture of the effect of one on another. Taking many weather research satellites and comparisons of variable inter- planetary parameters with one another can be interpreted. Dividing geomagnetic storms into differential categories and interpretations to its variations can be made.

 

REFERENCES

1. Ahmed, O., Badruddin, B., & Derouich, M. (2024). Dynamics and solar wind control of the recovery of strong geomagnetic storms. Astrophysics and Space Science, 369(7), 64.
2. Lazzús, J. A., & Salfate, I. (2024). Report of the effects of the May 2024 Mother’s Day geomagnetic storm observed from Chile. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 106304.
3. Salloum, S. A. (2024). Predictive Analysis of Geomagnetic Disturbance Using Satellite Solar Wind Measurements.
4. Yeeram, T. (2024). The effects of solar radiation and geomagnetic disturbance during consecutive 27-day recurrent geomagnetic storms on variations of equatorial ionospheric parameters and spread F. Astrophysics and Space Science, 369(6), 1-15.
5. Priyadarshi, S. (2024). Prediction of high latitude nightside Geomagnetic Field Disturbances (GGFDs) during the 9-March-2012 geomagnetic storm using Recurrent Neural Network (RNN). Advances in Space Research.
6. Sheng, C., Deng, Y., Welling, D. T., & Morley, S. K. (2024). Geomagnetic disturbances due to neutral‐wind‐driven ionospheric currents. Space Weather, 22(3), e2023SW003750.
7. He, C., Li, W., Hu, A., Zheng, D., Cai, H., & Xiong, Z. (2024). Thermospheric Mass Density Modelling during Geomagnetic Quiet and Weakly Disturbed Time. Atmosphere, 15(1), 72.
8. Ma, X., Lin, Z., Wang, X., Li, Q., & Zhang, S. (2024). Geomagnetic disturbance of the meridian chain at mid and low latitudes during 2015 geomagnetic storms. Astrophysics and Space Science, 369(5), 46.
9. Hoilijoki, S., Kilpua, E., Osmane, A., Turc, L., Savola, M., Lipsanen, V., … & Kalliokoski, M. (2024). Impact of solar cycle on the non-linearity of the relationship between the solar wind parameters and geomagnetic conditions. Annales Geophysicae Discussions, 2024, 1-21.
10. Guastavino, S., Bahamazava, K., Perracchione, E., Camattari, F., Audone, G., Telloni, D., … & Massone, A. M. (2024). Forecasting Geoffective Events from Solar Wind Data and Evaluating the Most Predictive Features through Machine Learning Approaches. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.09847.
11. Gulyaeva, T. L. (2024). Interaction of global electron content with the Sun and solar wind during intense geomagnetic storms. Planetary and Space Science, 240, 105830.
12. Kumar, P., Pal, M., & Singh, S. (2024). Correlations the Interplanetary Characteristics and the Occurrence of Geomagnetic Large Storms. CME, 14(1).
13. Filippov, B. (2024). Solar Wind and Space Weather. In Eruptions on the Sun (pp. 361-387). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
14. Pathak, S., & Choudhary, S. (2024). Study of an Inter-Planetary Magnetic Field (IMF) Intensity during Space Weather Disturbances. International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology and Science, 12(2), 8-16.
15. Anoke-Uzosike, R., Akala, A. O., & Oyeyemi, E. O. (2024). Sub-daily solar wind-magnetosphere energy transfer during major geomagnetic storms of solar cycle 23. Advances in Space Research, 73(8), 4314-4328.
16. Lekh Nath Regmi (2024). First Principles Study of the Stability and Bonding Analysis of Hydrogen Cyanide and its Dimer. Dinkum Journal of Natural & Scientific Innovations, 3(01):58-80.
17. Vandegriff, E. M., Welling, D. T., Mukhopadhyay, A., Dimmock, A. P., Morley, S. K., & Lopez, R. E. (2024). Exploring localized geomagnetic disturbances in global MHD: Physics and numerics. Space Weather, 22(4), e2023SW003799.
18. Hao, H., Zhao, B., Jin, Y., Yue, X., Ding, F., Li, G., … & Li, Z. (2024). Latitude variation of the post‐sunset plasma density enhancement during the minor geomagnetic storm on 27 May 2021. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 129(3), e2023JA032156.
19. Melkumyan, A. A., Belov, A. V., Shlyk, N. S., Abunina, M. A., Abunin, A. A., Oleneva, V. A., & Yanke, V. G. (2024). Forbush decreases and geomagnetic disturbances: 2. Comparison of solar cycles 23–24 and events with sudden and gradual commencement. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 64(1), 32-43.
20. Parihar, S. S., Verma, P. L., & Tiwari, C. M. Solar Wind Plasma Parameters in Relation with Good Quality Magnetic Cloud Related Geomagnetic Storms.
21. Uga, C. I., Gautam, S. P., & Seba, E. B. (2024). TEC disturbances caused by CME-triggered geomagnetic storm of September 6–9, 2017. Heliyon, 10(10).
22. Chaurasiya, D. K., Shrivastava, V., Goyal, S., & Shrivastava, P. K. Comparative Study of Geomagnetic Storms during the Rising Phase of Solar Cycle 25.
23. Heinemann, S. G., Sishtla, C., Good, S., Grandin, M., & Pomoell, J. (2024). Classification of Enhanced Geoeffectiveness Resulting from High-speed Solar Wind Streams Compressing Slower Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 963(1), L25.
24. Hayakawa, H., Ebihara, Y., Mishev, A., Koldobskiy, S., Kusano, K., Bechet, S., … & Miyoshi, Y. (2024). The Solar and Geomagnetic Storms in May 2024: A Flash Data Report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.07665.
25. Le, G., Liu, G., Yizengaw, E., Wu, C. C., Zheng, Y., Vines, S., & Buzulukova, N. (2024). Responses of field‐aligned currents and equatorial electrojet to sudden decrease of solar wind dynamic pressure during the March 2023 geomagnetic storm. Geophysical Research Letters, 51(10), e2024GL109427.
26. Giri, A., Adhikari, B., Idosa, C., & Pandit, D. (2024). Analysis of ground and space geoelectric field during geomagnetic storms over Fresno, CA USA: wavelet coherence approach. Indian Journal of Physics, 1-10.
27. Rakhmanova, L. S., Khokhlachev, A. A., Riazantseva, M. O., Yermolaev, Y. I., & Zastenker, G. N. (2024). TURBULENCE DEVELOPMENT BEHIND THE BOW SHOCK DURING DISTURBED AND UNDISTURBED SOLAR WIND. Solar-Terrestrial Physics, 10(2), 13-25.
28. Zou, Z., Zuo, P., Ni, B., Huang, H., Hu, J., Wei, J., … & San, W. (2024). Statistical analysis of the phase space density changes of radiation belt source, seed, and relativistic electrons in response to geomagnetic storms. Physics of Fluids, 36(3).
29. Huang, H., Zou, Z., Hu, J., San, W., Yuan, Q., Zhu, B., & Zhou, W. (2024). Characteristics of radiation belt energetic protons and the movement of their core location in response to geomagnetic disturbances. Physics of Fluids, 36(7).
30. Anita Shukla, L. Geomagnetic Storms in Relation to Magnetic Clouds, Hard X-Ray Solar Flares, and Disturbances in Interplanetary Magnetic Fields During 1996-2008.
31. Fleetham, A. L., Milan, S. E., Imber, S. M., Bower, G. E., Gjerloev, J., & Vines, S. K. (2024). The relationship between large dB/dt and field‐aligned currents during five geomagnetic storms. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 129(7), e2024JA032483.
32. Starodubtsev, S. A., Gololobov, P. Y., Grigoryev, V. G., & Zverev, A. S. (2024). MHD Waves in Solar Wind Plasma during Geomagnetic Storm Events in February–March 2023. Cosmic Research, 62(2), 178-186.