Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 113 references

Investigating the Behavior and Spatiotemporal Variations of Green Line Emission in the Solar Corona

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The solar corona's green-line emission flips hemispheric dominance every four solar cycles, revealing a 44-year rhythm in Fe XIV brightness across nine cycles.

desk verdict A solid empirical study whose headline 44-year cycle claim exceeds the evidence; the 73/27 latitude ratio and harmonic periods are the real contributions. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16980 v1 pith:LB5V7YSL submitted 2024-11-25 astro-ph.SR

Jacob Oloketuyi (SWJTU , BOUESTI) , Yu Liu (SWJTU) , Linhua Deng (YMU-KUNMING) , Abouazza Elmhamdi (KSU-SAUDI ARABIA) , Fengrong Zhu (SWJTU) , Ayodeji Ibitoye (NAOC , NWU-SA
show 4 more authors
AAUA) Opeyemi Omole (BOUESTI) Feiyang Sha (SWJTU) Qiang Liu (CWNU)
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords green-linecoronaFeXIV530.3nmnorth–southasymmetrysolarcyclehemisphericdominancecoronalindexwaveletanalysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks whether the Sun's corona, seen through the Fe XIV 530.3 nm green line, varies symmetrically in space and time across nine solar cycles (1939–2024). Using a daily, 5-degree-resolution coronal intensity record, it argues that it does not: low latitudes produce about 73% of the emission, the two hemispheres trade dominance in four-cycle blocks, and the whole record shows a dominant 44.89-year periodicity alongside the familiar ~11-year cycle. The authors conclude that the green line's behavior is tied to flares, sunspots, and CMEs, and that declining-phase emissions decide which hemisphere leads in most cycles. A sympathetic reader would care because a long, regular hemispheric seesaw in coronal brightness would be a new, large-scale constraint on solar cycle dynamics.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Modified Homogeneous Data Set (MHDS), a daily 5-degree position-angle record of $\mathrm{Fe\,XIV}$ 530.3 nm coronal intensity from 1939 to 2024, formed by calibrating SOHO/EIT Fe XV 28.4 nm and CELIAS 26–34 nm measurements onto the ground-based green-line intensity scale (calibration correlation $r=0.8986$). Around this data set the argument turns on three tools: the north–south asymmetry index $(C_N - C_S)/(C_N + C_S)$ for determining which hemisphere leads; cross-correlation for testing whether the hemispheres move together; and a Morlet continuous wavelet transform whose global spectrum identifies the 44.89-year dominant period and its harmonics. The MHDS supplies the long baseline, the asymmetry index supplies the four-cycle blocks, and the wavelet spectrum supplies the period that names the cycle.

What would settle it

Recompute the north–south asymmetry separately for the ground-based HDS era (1939–1996) and the EUV-calibrated MHDS era (1996–2024), and compare the result with an independent asymmetry series such as sunspot area or magnetic butterfly diagrams; if the four-cycle north block (cycles 17–20) and four-cycle south block (21–24) break at the calibration boundary or disappear entirely, the 44-year hemispheric dominance claim would be an instrumental artifact rather than coronal behavior.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is a 44-year hemispheric dominance cycle in coronal green-line emission: the northern hemisphere led in four consecutive solar cycles (17–20), the southern hemisphere led in the next four (21–24), and Solar Cycle 25 is beginning a new northward block. The supporting analysis shows low-latitude emission is roughly 73% of the total, high-latitude emission follows a more irregular pattern, the north and south are strongly synchronized (global cross-correlation 0.93 at zero lag), and the global wavelet spectrum peaks at 44.89 years with harmonics at 22.44, 11.22, and 2.81 years. The authors also find that the declining phase of each cycle, rather than the rising phase, drives the hemispheric lead in most cycles.

Load-bearing premise

The entire analysis depends on the calibration that stitches space-based EUV intensities to the ground-based Fe XIV scale without introducing any long-term drift or a hemisphere-dependent bias across the nine cycles; if that homogeneity breaks, the 44-year alternation and the 73% low-latitude share could be instrumental artifacts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the 44-year alternation is real, Solar Cycle 25 opens a northward block, so northern dominance should persist through Cycles 25–28 before the lead moves south again.
  • The harmonic family (44.89, 22.44, 11.22, 2.81 yr) implies the hemispheric dominance cycle is tied to the Hale cycle and its subharmonics, not just to the 11-year Schwabe cycle.
  • Because low-latitude emission tracks the sunspot cycle while high-latitude emission does not, the two latitude bands carry different coronal heating and magnetic-structure signals; future coronal heating models must reproduce that distinction.
  • Since declining-phase emission determines the hemispheric lead in most cycles, the asymmetry of a solar cycle is largely set after solar maximum.
  • Cross-correlations peaking at zero lag with asymmetric wings mean the hemispheres stay synchronized but one hemisphere tends to influence the other with a short delay, consistent with delayed energy or magnetic reconfiguration transfer.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A decisive check not performed in the paper: recompute the north–south asymmetry from the ground-only HDS data (before the EUV-calibrated extension) and from independent proxies such as sunspot-area or magnetic-butterfly asymmetries; if the four-cycle blocks vanish at the 1996 calibration boundary, the 44-year cycle would be an artifact.
  • If the 44-year rhythm survives that check, solar dynamo models would need a mechanism with a four-cycle (~44-year) hemispheric memory, such as a long-lived coupling between hemispheres in the tachocline or a modulation of the dynamo's parity, which the paper does not propose.
  • The paper's 73/27 low-to-high latitude emission ratio offers a quantitative target for coronal heating models and could be tested directly with modern EUV emission-measure maps over a complete cycle.
  • The 44.89-year wavelet peak is based on an 85-year series, so its significance is limited; extending the record backward with historical eclipse observations or coronal index reconstructions would either harden or erase the period.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes the 530.3 nm Fe XIV coronal green-line emission from the Modified Homogeneous Data Set (MHDS) over 1939-2024, covering solar cycles 17-25. The authors compute N-S asymmetry, cross-correlation between hemispheres, power spectral densities, and Morlet continuous wavelet transforms for global, hemispheric, and high/low-latitude series. They report that low latitudes contribute about 73% of total emission, strong zero-lag hemispheric synchronization (r=0.93 global), quasi-harmonic periods at 44.89, 22.44, 11.22, and 2.81 yr, and claim a 44-yr hemispheric dominance cycle with northern dominance in cycles 17-20 and southern dominance in cycles 21-24. The paper also catalogs numerous shorter periodicities and connects them to previous sunspot, flare, and CME studies.

Significance. If the 44-yr hemispheric dominance claim were firmly established, it would link the ~11-yr activity cycle to a two-cycle-scale asymmetry rhythm in coronal Fe XIV emission and would constrain hemispheric coupling in dynamo models. The paper's empirical core is largely transparent: the MHDS is a widely used dataset, the analysis uses standard tools (CWT, PSD, cross-correlation) without fitted model parameters, and the latitudinal energy partition (73/27) and high zero-lag correlation coefficients are robust, clearly presented results. However, the headline periodicity rests on a small number of alternations and on cycle-mean asymmetries for which no uncertainties are given, so the significance of the central claim is currently limited.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.3, Table 1, Figure 6, Conclusion item 4] The claim of a 44-yr hemispheric dominance cycle is not statistically supported as stated. The southern dominance block is driven mainly by SC22 (-2.54), while the asymmetries for SC21 (-0.14), SC23 (-0.27), and SC24 (-0.34) are within about 0.35 of zero; the northern asymmetries are +3.01, +1.13, +3.69, and +2.88. No standard errors, confidence intervals, or significance tests are reported for these cycle-mean asymmetries, and the 44.89-yr wavelet peak (Table 5) is estimated from roughly 1.9 cycles of data. The text itself cautions that the 40-45-yr periodicity is 'not entirely reliable' (Section 3.5.1) and that 85 yr of data is 'only partially adequate for a reliable conclusion' (Section 3.3), yet the abstract and Conclusion item 4 present the 44-yr cycle as an established result. Please add a quantitative significance assessment (e.g., bootstrap or surrogate-data tests) or explicitly recast the claim as a tentative observation requiring longer records.
  2. [Section 2.1] The long-term and hemispheric conclusions depend on the homogeneity of the MHDS across the 1996 transition from ground-based Fe XIV observations to SOHO/EIT 28.4 nm and CELIAS 26-34 nm data, which are calibrated via a correlation coefficient r=0.8986. The manuscript does not test whether this calibration introduces a time-dependent or hemisphere-dependent bias. I recommend quantifying the stability of the calibration over time, for example through overlap-period comparisons, pre-1996 vs post-1996 hemispheric asymmetries, and hemisphere-specific calibration residuals, to show that the 44-yr dominance pattern and the 73/27 latitudinal ratio are not instrumental artifacts.
  3. [Section 2.2.1 and Table 1] The N-S asymmetry metric is inconsistently defined. Eq. (1) defines a normalized asymmetry (difference over sum), but Table 1's 'Asym.' column reports simple differences (e.g., SC17: 24.20 - 21.19 = 3.01). This discrepancy affects all dominance margins and the global 'tiny margins' values. Please state the exact formula used, correct Eq. (1) if Table 1 is intended, or recompute Table 1 and Figure 6 if normalized asymmetry is intended.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3.5] The PSD text reports sharp drops at frequencies such as 136, 157, 240 Hz and similar; these units are implausible for a time series of daily or monthly solar data and appear inconsistent with the expected frequency axis (likely cycles per year or period in days). Please clarify the units and relabel the axes consistently.
  2. [Section 2.2.2, Eq. (2)] The cross-correlation formula is garbled in the typeset text and should be rewritten in conventional notation so that the lag convention and normalization are clear.
  3. [Tables 4 and 5 captions] The caption of Table 4 states 'Analyzed in Figure 13' and Table 5 states 'Analyzed in Figure 12'; these cross-references appear to be swapped and should be corrected.
  4. [Section 3.3] The sentence 'the paradigm of N-S dominant shifting from north to south at intervals of four solar cycles demonstrates a harmonic 22 yr solar magnetic cycle' is confusing: four solar cycles correspond to roughly 44 yr, not 22 yr. Please clarify the intended relationship.
  5. [Table 6, North High Latitudes row] The entry '90-154 yr 1947-1952' appears to be a unit error; the period should presumably be in days, as in the neighboring rows. Similar unit checks are needed for other rows (e.g., '1.0-1.4' missing 'yr').
  6. [Conclusions items 10 and 12] The text refers to 'SPD analysis' in items 10 and 12; the correct acronym is 'PSD' as used elsewhere.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: all claims are direct descriptive statistics of an externally provided time series.

full rationale

The paper is a data-driven observational study. The MHDS time series is externally constructed (Rybanský et al. 2005; Dorotovič et al. 2014), not fitted within this paper to the quantities being reported. The central claims — low-latitude dominance (~73%), cycle-mean N–S asymmetries, and the 44-year dominance alternation — are direct outputs of averaging, cross-correlation, PSD, and wavelet analysis applied to that series. No parameter is fitted to a subset of the data and then used to predict a closely related quantity; the harmonic periods (44.89, 22.44, 11.22, 2.81 yr) are outputs of the wavelet transform, not constants inserted to reproduce those periods. The paper explicitly cautions that '85 yr of series data is only partially adequate for a reliable conclusion' regarding the long-period peak. Self-citations to earlier Oloketuyi papers are used for comparison of periodicities and for the observed decline in Cycle 25; they are not load-bearing for the main asymmetry claim and do not substitute for the analysis performed here. The 44-year hemispheric dominance claim is a summarizing description of the sign of the directly computed cycle-mean asymmetries, not a result derived from an input that already contains it. No circular step can be exhibited from the paper's equations or argument structure.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No quantities are fitted to data. Periodicities, correlation coefficients, and asymmetry indices are direct outputs of standard estimators. The '44-year cycle' is a pattern descriptor of the observed dominance sequence, not a fitted parameter, though its value is uncertain given only two alternations. No new physical entities are proposed; interpretive mechanisms are drawn from prior literature.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The MHDS provides a homogeneous, calibration-stable record of 530.3 nm Fe XIV intensity from 1939-2024, combining ground-based coronagraphs and space-based proxies (EIT, CELIAS).
    Invoked throughout Section 2.1 and used for all figures; if the correlation-based calibration (r=0.8986) drifts over time, the long-term trends and hemispheric dominance claims are compromised.
  • domain assumption Each 5-degree position-angle bin measures coronal emission originating at the corresponding solar latitude, with line-of-sight integration not distorting the latitudinal assignment.
    Section 2.1 establishes the binning; the 73/27 low/high latitude comparison assumes the bins isolate physical latitudes rather than integrated line-of-sight contributions.
  • standard math Wavelet and Fourier analyses assume a stationary time series with a red-noise background; peaks near the record-length scale (44.9 yr) are treated as real power despite edge effects.
    Section 3.5.1 applies the Torrence-Compo wavelet with a red-noise approximation; the 44.89 yr GWS peak is the paper's headline periodicity but spans only two cycles and is near the cone of influence.
  • ad hoc to paper The rise/decline phase split of each solar cycle uses an implicit, unspecified definition of cycle maximum.
    Section 3.3 and Table 1 report phase-resolved asymmetries, but no criterion for placing the cycle-maximum boundary is given; different splits could change which phase drives the hemispheric lead.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Investigating the Behavior and Spatiotemporal Variations of Green Line Emission in the Solar Corona." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LB5V7YSL

@misc{pith2026241116980,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Investigating the Behavior and Spatiotemporal Variations of Green Line Emission in the Solar Corona},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LB5V7YSL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16980}
}
read the original abstract

Understanding coronal structure and dynamics can be facilitated by analyzing green-line emission, which enables the investigation of diverse coronal structures such as coronal loops, streamers, coronal holes, and various eruptions in the solar atmosphere. In this study, we investigated the spatiotemporal behaviors of green-line emissions in both low and high latitudes across nine solar cycles, ranging from cycle 17 to the current cycle 25, using the Modified Homogeneous Data Set (MHDS). We employed methodologies such as cross-correlation, power spectral density (PSD), and wavelet transform techniques for this analysis. We found distinct behaviors in green line energy across various latitudinal distributions in the solar atmosphere. The trends observed at higher latitudes differ from those at lower latitudes. The emission behaviors show a close association with other solar phenomena like solar flares, sunspots, and coronal mass ejections (CMEs) throughout the solar cycles. The observed variations exhibit harmonic periods. The emission activity is significantly higher in the low latitudes, accounting for over 70 percent of the emissions, while the higher latitudes contribute less than 30 percent. The emissions exhibit asymmetric behavior between the northern and southern hemispheres, leading to a 44-year cycle of solar hemispheric dominance shifts. Various factors, such as Alfv\'en waves, solar magnetic fields, sunspots, differential rotation, and reconnection events, influence the observed differences in behavior between lower and higher latitudes, suggesting the existence of potential underlying phenomena contributing to deviations in properties, intensity, temporal dynamics, and spatiotemporal lifetime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16980 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The evolutionary trends of green-line coronal emissions from 1939 to 2024. Panel (a) shows the global trend in black, while panel (b) shows the trends for the northern (blue) and southern (magenta) hemispheres. 4 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 275:3 (21pp), 2024 November Oloketuyi et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The evolutionary trends obtained from low and high latitudes of the Sun. Panel (a) shows the global trends for high (black) and low (red) latitudes. Panels (b) and (c) show trends obtained from the northern and southern hemispheres, respectively, where blue and magenta colors corresponds to high and low latitudes, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The evolutionary trends obtained for high (black) and low latitudes (pink) for solar cycles. 5 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 275:3 (21pp), 2024 November Oloketuyi et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The evolutionary trends in the northern hemisphere obtained for high (blue) and low (pink) latitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The evolutionary trends in the southern hemisphere obtained for high (blue) and low (pink) latitudes. 6 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 275:3 (21pp), 2024 November Oloketuyi et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The north–south asymmetry. (a) The dominance trend showing the leading region. (b) Average mean values for north and south. (c) North–south asymmetry showing the leading phase across the northern and southern hemispheres. (d) Average mean values for rising and declinin…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The cross correlations between the solar north and south regions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The cross correlations between the solar north and south regions across the solar cycles. 9 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 275:3 (21pp), 2024 November Oloketuyi et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The PSD analysis of green-line coronal emissions for the global Sun (top) and the solar north (blue) and south (magenta)(bottom) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The PSD analysis of green-line coronal emissions at the high and low latitudes for (the global Sun (top), solar north (middle), and solar south (bottom). 11 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 275:3 (21pp), 2024 November Oloketuyi et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figu…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The PSD analysis of green-line coronal emissions between the solar north and south regions across the solar cycles. 12 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 275:3 (21pp), 2024 November Oloketuyi et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The wavelet analysis of green-line coronal emissions for (a) the global Sun, (b) the solar north, and (c) the solar south [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The wavelet analysis of green-line coronal emissions for high and low latitudes of the Sun. 13 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 275:3 (21pp), 2024 November Oloketuyi et al [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

113 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2006, Int

    Andren, P. 2006, Int. J. Veh. Des. , 40, 2

    2006

  2. [2]

    2020, SSRv, 216, 117

    Antonucci, E., Harra, L., Susino, R., & Telloni, D. 2020, SSRv, 216, 117

    2020

  3. [3]

    Aschwanden, M. J. 2004, ApJ, 608, 554 Ataç, T., & Özgüç, A. 1996, SoPh, 166, 201

    2004

  4. [4]

    2013, ARep, 57, 222

    Badalyan, O. 2013, ARep, 57, 222

    2013

  5. [5]

    G., & Obridko, V

    Badalyan, O. G., & Obridko, V. N. 2006, SoPh, 238, 271

    2006

  6. [6]

    G., & Obridko, V

    Badalyan, O. G., & Obridko, V. N. 2007, AstL, 33, 182

    2007

  7. [7]

    Bai, T., & Sturrock, P. A. 1991, Natur, 350, 141

    1991

  8. [8]

    2018, JASTP, 177, 12

    Barlyaeva, T., Wojak, J., Lamy, P., Boclet, B., & Toth, I. 2018, JASTP, 177, 12

    2018

Show all 113 references
  1. [9]

    O., & Gudel, M

    Benz, A. O., & Gudel, M. 2010, ARA&A, 48, 241

    2010

  2. [10]

    Bhowmik, P., & Yeates, A. R. 2021, SoPh, 296, 109

    2021

  3. [11]

    G., & Badalyan, O

    Bludova, N. G., & Badalyan, O. G. 2006, AstL, 32, 698

    2006

  4. [12]

    G., Obridko, V

    Bludova, N. G., Obridko, V. N., & Badalyan, O. G. 2014, SoPh, 289, 1013

    2014

  5. [13]

    2020, ApJ, 888, 100

    Boe, B., Habbal, S., Druckmuller, M., et al. 2020, ApJ, 888, 100

    2020

  6. [14]

    Bolton, S. J. 1990, GeoRL, 17, 37

    1990

  7. [15]

    Bouwer, S. D. 1992, SoPh, 142, 365

    1992

  8. [16]

    2017, PhPl, 24, 050704

    Chen, J. 2017, PhPl, 24, 050704

    2017

  9. [17]

    2011, JASS, 28, 1

    Cho, I.-H., & Chang, H.-Y. 2011, JASS, 28, 1

    2011

  10. [18]

    P., Gosain, S., & Moon, Y.-J

    Chowdhury, P., Choudhary, D. P., Gosain, S., & Moon, Y.-J. 2015, Ap&SS, 356, 7

    2015

  11. [19]

    Chowdhury, P., & Dwivedi, B. N. 2011, SoPh, 270, 365

    2011

  12. [20]

    Chowdhury, P., Khan, M., & Ray, P. C. 2009, MNRAS, 392, 1159

    2009

  13. [21]

    Chowdhury, P., Khan, M., & Ray, P. C. 2010, Ap&SS, 326, 191

    2010

  14. [22]

    Chui, C. K. 1992, An Introduction to Wavelets, Vol. 1 (New York: Academic ) De Moortel, I., Ireland, J., Walsh, R. W., & Hood, A. W. 2002, SoPh, 209, 61

    1992

  15. [23]

    H., Li, B., Xiang, Y

    Deng, L. H., Li, B., Xiang, Y. Y., & Dun, G. T. 2015, AJ, 151, 2 Dorotovič, I., Minarovjech, M., Lorenc, M., & Rybansk ỳ, M. 2014, SoPh, 289, 2697

    2015

  16. [24]

    N., & Srivastava, A

    Dwivedi, B. N., & Srivastava, A. K. 2006, SoPh, 237, 143

    2006

  17. [25]

    M., & Bennett, J

    Elson, J. M., & Bennett, J. M. 1995, ApOpt, 34, 201

    1995

  18. [26]

    A., Webb, D

    Emery, B. A., Webb, D. F., Gibson, S. E., et al. 2021, SoPh, 296, 119

    2021

  19. [27]

    2014, SSRv, 186, 105

    Ermolli, I., Shibasaki, K., Tlatov, A., & van Driel-Gesztelyi, L. 2014, SSRv, 186, 105

    2014

  20. [28]

    1996, JGR, 101, 13445

    Galsgaard, K., & Nordlund, Å. 1996, JGR, 101, 13445

    1996

  21. [29]

    Gilman, P. A. 1974, ARA&A, 12, 47

    1974

  22. [30]

    1960, MNRAS, 120, 89

    Gold, T., & Hoyle, F. 1960, MNRAS, 120, 89

    1960

  23. [31]

    C., & Jevrejeva, S

    Grinsted, A., Moore, J. C., & Jevrejeva, S. 2004, NPGeo, 11, 561

    2004

  24. [32]

    R., Druckmüller, M., Morgan, H., et al

    Habbal, S. R., Druckmüller, M., Morgan, H., et al. 2009, ApJ, 708, 1650

    2009

  25. [33]

    R., Druckmuller, M., Morgan, H., et al

    Habbal, S. R., Druckmuller, M., Morgan, H., et al. 2011, ApJ, 734, 120

    2011

  26. [34]

    2004, in ASP Conf

    Hagino, M., Sakurai, T., & Miyazawa, A. 2004, in ASP Conf. Ser. 325, The Solar-B Mission and the Forefront of Solar Physics, ed. T. Sakurai & T. Sekii (San Francisco, CA: ASP ), 157

    2004

  27. [35]

    1995, A&A, 301, 577

    Halberstadt, G., & Goedbloed, J. 1995, A&A, 301, 577

    1995

  28. [36]

    H., & Wilson, R

    Hathaway, D. H., & Wilson, R. M. 1990, ApJ, 357, 271

    1990

  29. [37]

    Hollweg, J. V. 1985, JGR, 90, 7620

    1985

  30. [38]

    2005, ApJ, 618, 1001

    Hori, K., Ichimoto, K., Sakurai, T., Sano, I., & Nishino, Y. 2005, ApJ, 618, 1001

    2005

  31. [39]

    2023, ApJL, 958, L13

    Huang, J., Zhang, Y., Tan, B., et al. 2023, ApJL, 958, L13

    2023

  32. [40]

    2014, ApJ, 796, 80

    Hwangbo, J.-E., Lee, J., Park, S.-H., et al. 2014, ApJ, 796, 80

    2014

  33. [41]

    1995, A&A, 302, 567

    Inverarity, G., & Priest, E. 1995, A&A, 302, 567

    1995

  34. [42]

    2006, A&A, 452, 647

    Joshi, B., Pant, P., & Manoharan, P. 2006, A&A, 452, 647

    2006

  35. [43]

    Kane, R. P. 2002, SoPh, 209, 207

    2002

  36. [44]

    Kane, R. P. 2005, SoPh, 227, 155

    2005

  37. [45]

    T., Antiochos, S

    Karpen, J. T., Antiochos, S. K., & DeVore, C. R. 2012, ApJ , 760, 81

    2012

  38. [46]

    O., & Berdyugina, S

    Knaack, R., Sten flo, J. O., & Berdyugina, S. 2005, A&A, 438, 1067

    2005

  39. [47]

    P., Emslie, A

    Kontar, E. P., Emslie, A. G., Clarkson, D. L., et al. 2023, ApJ, 956, 112

    2023

  40. [48]

    2004, ApJ, 610, 537

    Kusano, K., Maeshiro, T., Yokoyama, T., & Sakurai, T. 2004, ApJ, 610, 537

    2004

  41. [49]

    T., Cheng, X., Ni, Y

    Li, H. T., Cheng, X., Ni, Y. W., et al. 2023, ApJL, 958, L42

    2023

  42. [50]

    2002, A&A, 383, 648

    Li, K., Wang, J., Xiong, S., et al. 2002, A&A, 383, 648

    2002

  43. [51]

    Lopez-Comazzi, A., & Blanco, J. J. 2022, ApJ, 927, 155

    2022

  44. [52]

    2000, ApJ, 540, 1102

    Lou, Y.-Q. 2000, ApJ, 540, 1102

    2000

  45. [53]

    Lou, Y.-Q., Wang, Y.-M., Fan, Z., Wang, S., & Wang, J. X. 2003, MNRAS, 345, 809

    2003

  46. [54]

    2024, NatAs, 8, 706

    Lu, Z., Chen, F., Ding, M., et al. 2024, NatAs, 8, 706

    2024

  47. [55]

    2019, A&A, 629, A20

    Luna, M., Oliver, R., Antolin, P., & Arregui, I. 2019, A&A, 629, A20

    2019

  48. [56]

    E., Emslie, A

    Machado, M. E., Emslie, A. G., & Brown, J. C. 1978, SoPh, 58, 363

    1978

  49. [57]

    Martin, S. F. 1980, SoPh, 68, 217

    1980

  50. [58]

    1997, in The First Results from SOHO, ed

    Moses, D., Clette, F., Delaboudinière, J.-P., et al. 1997, in The First Results from SOHO, ed. B. Fleck & Z. Švestka (Dordrecht: Springer ), 571

    1997

  51. [59]

    H., Gosling, J

    Munro, R. H., Gosling, J. T., Hildner, E., et al. 1979, SoPh, 61, 201

    1979

  52. [60]

    2000, AdSpR, 25, 1939

    Mursula, K., & Zieger, B. 2000, AdSpR, 25, 1939

    2000

  53. [61]

    A., Osipova, A., & Ivanov, V

    Nagovitsyn, Y. A., Osipova, A., & Ivanov, V. 2024, ARep, 68, 89

    2024

  54. [62]

    M., Pilipenko, V., Heilig, B., et al

    Nakariakov, V. M., Pilipenko, V., Heilig, B., et al. 2016, SSRv, 200, 75

    2016

  55. [63]

    Nayar, S. P. 2006, Solar In fluence on the Heliosphere and Earth's Environment: Recent Progress and Prospects, ed. N. Gopalswamy & A. Bhattacharyya, (Quest Publications ), 170, https://cdaw.gsfc.nasa.gov/publications/ilws_ goa2006/170_PrabhakaranNayar.pdf

    2006

  56. [64]

    M., & Steinolfson, R

    Ofman, L., Davila, J. M., & Steinolfson, R. S. 1995, GeoRL, 22, 2679

    1995

  57. [65]

    C., & Zhao, M

    Oloketuyi, J., Liu, Y., Amanambu, A. C., & Zhao, M. 2020, AdAst, 2020, 3527570

    2020

  58. [66]

    2023, NewA, 100, 101972

    Oloketuyi, J., Liu, Y., & Elmhamdi, A. 2023, NewA, 100, 101972

    2023

  59. [67]

    2024, Ap&SS, 369, 35

    Oloketuyi, J., Liu, Y., Elmhamdi, A., Zhu, F., & Deng, L. 2024, Ap&SS, 369, 35

    2024

  60. [68]

    2019, ApJ, 874, 20

    Oloketuyi, J., Liu, Y., & Zhao, M. 2019, ApJ, 874, 20

    2019

  61. [69]

    2024, DiAtm, 2, 5

    Oloketuyi, J., & Omole, O. 2024, DiAtm, 2, 5

    2024

  62. [70]

    1994, SoPh, 150, 339

    Ozguc, A., & Atac, T. 1994, SoPh, 150, 339

    1994

  63. [71]

    2021, AdAst, 2021, 5391091

    Ozguc, A., Kilcik, A., Sarp, V., et al. 2021, AdAst, 2021, 5391091

    2021

  64. [72]

    I., Szabo, A., & Richardson, J

    Paularena, K. I., Szabo, A., & Richardson, J. D. 1995, GeoRL, 22, 3001

    1995

  65. [73]

    P., Brueckner, G

    Plunkett, S. P., Brueckner, G. E., Dere, K. P., et al. 1997, SoPh, 175, 699

    1997

  66. [74]

    2003, MNRAS, 343, 725 Popiński, N., & Kosek, W 1994, ArtSa, 29, 75 Porfir’eva, G., Yakunina, G., Borovik, V., & Grigoryeva, I

    Polygiannakis, J., Preka-Papadema, P., & Moussas, X. 2003, MNRAS, 343, 725 Popiński, N., & Kosek, W 1994, ArtSa, 29, 75 Porfir’eva, G., Yakunina, G., Borovik, V., & Grigoryeva, I. 2012, in The Sun: New Challenges: Proc. Symp. 3 of JENAM 2011, ed. V. Obridko, K. Georgieva, & Y. ...

    2022

  67. [75]

    K., Singh, J., & Banerjee, D

    Prasad, S. K., Singh, J., & Banerjee, D. 2013, SoPh, 282, 427

    2013

  68. [76]

    D., Paularena, K

    Richardson, J. D., Paularena, K. I., Belcher, J. W., & Lazarus, A. J. 1994, GeoRL, 21, 1559

    1994

  69. [77]

    H., Forrest, D

    Rieger, E., Share, G. H., Forrest, D. J., et al. 1984, Natur, 312, 623

    1984

  70. [78]

    Ruderman, D. L. 1997, Vis. Res. , 37, 3385

    1997

  71. [79]

    1975, BAICz, 26, 367

    Rybansky, M. 1975, BAICz, 26, 367

    1975

  72. [80]

    1985, BAICz, 36, 73

    Rybansky, M., & Rusin, V. 1985, BAICz, 36, 73

    1985

  73. [81]

    1992, CoSkS, 22, 229 Rybanskỳ, M., Ru šin, V., Minarovjech, M., Klocok, L., & Cliver, E

    Rybansky, M., & Rusin, V. 1992, CoSkS, 22, 229 Rybanskỳ, M., Ru šin, V., Minarovjech, M., Klocok, L., & Cliver, E. 2005, JGRA, 110, A08106

    1992

  74. [82]

    2014, SSRv, 186, 227

    Schmieder, B., Archontis, V., & Pariat, E. 2014, SSRv, 186, 227

    2014

  75. [83]

    2018, in Electric Currents in Geospace and Beyond, ed

    Schmieder, B., & Aulanier, G. 2018, in Electric Currents in Geospace and Beyond, ed. A. Keiling, O. Marghitu, & M. Wheatland (New York: Wiley), 391 Schmitz-Hübsch, H., & Schuh, H. 2003, in Geodesy: The Challenge of the 3rd Millennium, ed. E. W. Grafarend, F. W. Krumm, & V. S. ...

    2018

  76. [84]

    K., Singh, N

    Sharma, J., Banerjee, S. K., Singh, N. K., & Vats, H. O. 2024, SoPh, 299, 90

    2024

  77. [85]

    K., & Vats, H

    Sharma, J., Kumar, B., Malik, A. K., & Vats, H. O. 2021, MNRAS, 506, 4952

    2021

  78. [86]

    2011, LRSP, 8, 6

    Shibata, K., & Magara, T. 2011, LRSP, 8, 6

    2011

  79. [87]

    H., & Stoffer, D

    Shumway, R. H., & Stoffer, D. S. 2000, Time Series Analysis and Its Applications (1st ed.; Berlin: Springer )

    2000

  80. [88]

    Singh, Y., & Badruddin 2014, P&SS, 96, 120

    2014

  81. [89]

    2009, SoPh, 254, 101

    Song, H., Tan, C., Jing, J., et al. 2009, SoPh, 254, 101

    2009

  82. [90]

    Q., Chen, Y., Ye, D

    Song, H. Q., Chen, Y., Ye, D. D., et al. 2013, ApJ, 773, 129

    2013

  83. [91]

    2006, PASJ, 58, 165

    Suzuki, I., Sakurai, T., & Ichimoto, K. 2006, PASJ, 58, 165

    2006

  84. [92]

    2022, SoPh, 297, 118

    Takalo, J. 2022, SoPh, 297, 118

    2022

  85. [93]

    2006, A&A, 447, 735

    Temmer, M., Rybák, J., Bendík, P., et al. 2006, A&A, 447, 735

    2006

  86. [94]

    To, A. S. H., James, A. W., Bastian, T. S., et al. 2023, ApJ, 948, 121

    2023

  87. [95]

    Torrence, C., & Compo, G. P. 1998, BAMS, 79, 61

    1998

  88. [96]

    2009, A&A, 502, 981 Velasco Herrera, V

    Vecchio, A., & Carbone, V. 2009, A&A, 502, 981 Velasco Herrera, V. M., Soon, W., Hoyt, D. V., & Murakozy, J. 2022, SoPh, 297, 8

    2009

  89. [97]

    1990, A&A, 229, 540

    Vizoso, G., & Ballester, J. 1990, A&A, 229, 540

    1990

  90. [98]

    2022, ApJ, 939, 111

    Wan, M., & Gao, P.-x. 2022, ApJ, 939, 111

    2022

  91. [99]

    2020, RAA, 20, 190

    Wan, M., Zeng, S.-G., Zheng, S., & Lin, G.-H. 2020, RAA, 20, 190

    2020

  92. [100]

    H., & Sheeley, N

    Wang, Y.-M., Hawley, S. H., & Sheeley, N. R. 1996, Sci, 271, 464

    1996

  93. [101]

    Wang, Y.-M., & Sheeley, Jr, N. R. 2003, ApJ, 590, 1111

    2003

  94. [102]

    1997, ApJ, 485, 419

    Wang, Y.-M., Sheeley, N., Jr., Hawley, S., et al. 1997, ApJ, 485, 419

    1997

  95. [103]

    2004, A&A, 418, 1117

    Warmuth, A., Vr šnak, B., Magdaleni ć, J., Hanslmeier, A., & Otruba, W. 2004, A&A, 418, 1117

    2004

  96. [104]

    N., et al

    Wilhelm, K., Marsch, E., Dwivedi, B. N., et al. 1998, ApJ, 500, 1023

    1998

  97. [105]

    2023, ApJ, 954, 20

    Wu, Q.-R., Zheng, S., Zeng, S.-G., et al. 2023, ApJ, 954, 20

    2023

  98. [106]

    2023, NatSR, 13, 21089

    Xiang, N., Zhao, X., Deng, L., Li, F., & Zheng, S. 2023, NatSR, 13, 21089

    2023

  99. [107]

    2021, Symm, 13, 2228

    Xu, H., Fei, Y., Li, C., et al. 2021, Symm, 13, 2228

    2021

  100. [108]

    2007, ChJAA, 7, 823

    Yin, Z.-Q., Han, Y.-B., Ma, L.-H., Le, G.-M., & Han, Y.-G. 2007, ChJAA, 7, 823

    2007

  101. [109]

    N., Gallagher, B

    Youngworth, R. N., Gallagher, B. B., & Stamper, B. L. 2005, Proc. SPIE , 5869, 206

    2005

  102. [110]

    V., & Shepherd, S

    Zharkova, V. V., & Shepherd, S. J. 2022, MNRAS, 512, 5085

    2022

  103. [111]

    V., Vasilieva, I., Shepherd, S

    Zharkova, V. V., Vasilieva, I., Shepherd, S. J., & Popova, E. 2023, NatSc, 15, 111

    2023

  104. [112]

    R., & Jia, H

    Zhu, F. R., & Jia, H. Y. 2018, Ap&SS, 363, 1

    2018

  105. [113]

    C., Verdejo, J., Chen, E., Zhang, P., et al

    Zhu, J., Snowden, J. C., Verdejo, J., Chen, E., Zhang, P., et al. 2021, in 34th Annual ACM Symp. on User Interface Software and Technology, ed. J. Nichols, R. Kumar, & M. Nebeling (New York: Association for Computing Machinery ), 400 21 The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Ser...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.