Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms

This paper presents a comparison between standard ionospheric parameters manually and automatically scaled from ionograms recorded at the high-latitude Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory (SGO, ionosonde SO166, 64.1° geomagnetic latitude), located in the vicinity of the auroral oval. The study is base...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems
Main Authors: Enell, Carl-Fredrik, Kozlovsky, Alexander, Turunen, Tauno, Ulich, Thomas, Välitalo, Sirkku, Scotto, Carlo, Pezzopane, Michael
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-5-53-2016
https://noa.gwlb.de/receive/cop_mods_00013753
https://noa.gwlb.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/cop_derivate_00013709/gi-5-53-2016.pdf
https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/5/53/2016/gi-5-53-2016.pdf
_version_ 1821711267999514624
author Enell, Carl-Fredrik
Kozlovsky, Alexander
Turunen, Tauno
Ulich, Thomas
Välitalo, Sirkku
Scotto, Carlo
Pezzopane, Michael
author_facet Enell, Carl-Fredrik
Kozlovsky, Alexander
Turunen, Tauno
Ulich, Thomas
Välitalo, Sirkku
Scotto, Carlo
Pezzopane, Michael
author_sort Enell, Carl-Fredrik
collection Niedersächsisches Online-Archiv NOA
container_issue 1
container_start_page 53
container_title Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems
container_volume 5
description This paper presents a comparison between standard ionospheric parameters manually and automatically scaled from ionograms recorded at the high-latitude Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory (SGO, ionosonde SO166, 64.1° geomagnetic latitude), located in the vicinity of the auroral oval. The study is based on 2610 ionograms recorded during the period June–December 2013. The automatic scaling was made by means of the Autoscala software. A few typical examples are shown to outline the method, and statistics are presented regarding the differences between manually and automatically scaled values of F2, F1, E and sporadic E (Es) layer parameters. We draw the conclusions that: 1. The F2 parameters scaled by Autoscala, foF2 and M(3000)F2, are reliable. 2. F1 is identified by Autoscala in significantly fewer cases (about 50 %) than in the manual routine, but if identified the values of foF1 are reliable. 3. Autoscala frequently (30 % of the cases) detects an E layer when the manual scaling process does not. When identified by both methods, the Autoscala E-layer parameters are close to those manually scaled, foE agreeing to within 0.4 MHz. 4. Es and parameters of Es identified by Autoscala are in many cases different from those of the manual scaling. Scaling of Es at auroral latitudes is often a difficult task.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
genre Sodankylä
genre_facet Sodankylä
geographic Sodankylä
geographic_facet Sodankylä
id ftnonlinearchiv:oai:noa.gwlb.de:cop_mods_00013753
institution Open Polar
language English
long_lat ENVELOPE(26.600,26.600,67.417,67.417)
op_collection_id ftnonlinearchiv
op_container_end_page 64
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-5-53-2016
op_relation Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems -- Geosci. Instrum. Meth. Data Syst. -- http://www.geoscientific-instrumentation-methods-and-data-systems.net/home.html -- http://www.bibliothek.uni-regensburg.de/ezeit/?2690575 -- 2193-0864
https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-5-53-2016
https://noa.gwlb.de/receive/cop_mods_00013753
https://noa.gwlb.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/cop_derivate_00013709/gi-5-53-2016.pdf
https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/5/53/2016/gi-5-53-2016.pdf
op_rights uneingeschränkt
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
publishDate 2016
publisher Copernicus Publications
record_format openpolar
spelling ftnonlinearchiv:oai:noa.gwlb.de:cop_mods_00013753 2025-01-17T00:48:21+00:00 Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms Enell, Carl-Fredrik Kozlovsky, Alexander Turunen, Tauno Ulich, Thomas Välitalo, Sirkku Scotto, Carlo Pezzopane, Michael 2016-03 electronic https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-5-53-2016 https://noa.gwlb.de/receive/cop_mods_00013753 https://noa.gwlb.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/cop_derivate_00013709/gi-5-53-2016.pdf https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/5/53/2016/gi-5-53-2016.pdf eng eng Copernicus Publications Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems -- Geosci. Instrum. Meth. Data Syst. -- http://www.geoscientific-instrumentation-methods-and-data-systems.net/home.html -- http://www.bibliothek.uni-regensburg.de/ezeit/?2690575 -- 2193-0864 https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-5-53-2016 https://noa.gwlb.de/receive/cop_mods_00013753 https://noa.gwlb.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/cop_derivate_00013709/gi-5-53-2016.pdf https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/5/53/2016/gi-5-53-2016.pdf uneingeschränkt info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess article Verlagsveröffentlichung article Text doc-type:article 2016 ftnonlinearchiv https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-5-53-2016 2022-02-08T22:55:28Z This paper presents a comparison between standard ionospheric parameters manually and automatically scaled from ionograms recorded at the high-latitude Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory (SGO, ionosonde SO166, 64.1° geomagnetic latitude), located in the vicinity of the auroral oval. The study is based on 2610 ionograms recorded during the period June–December 2013. The automatic scaling was made by means of the Autoscala software. A few typical examples are shown to outline the method, and statistics are presented regarding the differences between manually and automatically scaled values of F2, F1, E and sporadic E (Es) layer parameters. We draw the conclusions that: 1. The F2 parameters scaled by Autoscala, foF2 and M(3000)F2, are reliable. 2. F1 is identified by Autoscala in significantly fewer cases (about 50 %) than in the manual routine, but if identified the values of foF1 are reliable. 3. Autoscala frequently (30 % of the cases) detects an E layer when the manual scaling process does not. When identified by both methods, the Autoscala E-layer parameters are close to those manually scaled, foE agreeing to within 0.4 MHz. 4. Es and parameters of Es identified by Autoscala are in many cases different from those of the manual scaling. Scaling of Es at auroral latitudes is often a difficult task. Article in Journal/Newspaper Sodankylä Niedersächsisches Online-Archiv NOA Sodankylä ENVELOPE(26.600,26.600,67.417,67.417) Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems 5 1 53 64
spellingShingle article
Verlagsveröffentlichung
Enell, Carl-Fredrik
Kozlovsky, Alexander
Turunen, Tauno
Ulich, Thomas
Välitalo, Sirkku
Scotto, Carlo
Pezzopane, Michael
Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms
title Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms
title_full Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms
title_fullStr Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms
title_short Comparison between manual scaling and Autoscala automatic scaling applied to Sodankylä Geophysical Observatory ionograms
title_sort comparison between manual scaling and autoscala automatic scaling applied to sodankylä geophysical observatory ionograms
topic article
Verlagsveröffentlichung
topic_facet article
Verlagsveröffentlichung
url https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-5-53-2016
https://noa.gwlb.de/receive/cop_mods_00013753
https://noa.gwlb.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/cop_derivate_00013709/gi-5-53-2016.pdf
https://gi.copernicus.org/articles/5/53/2016/gi-5-53-2016.pdf