arxiv: 2605.05671 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-07 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Recognition: unknown

Microwave Polar Brightening and Its Connection to Polar Coronal Holes

Rohan Bose , Anshu Kumari , Vaibhav Pant , Srinjana Routh , Divya Paliwal , M. V. Sunil Krishna

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 05:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR

keywords polar brighteningpolar coronal holes17 GHz microwave emissionsolar polar magnetic fieldcoronal bright pointssolar cycle variationsNobeyama Radioheliograph

0 comments

The pith

Microwave polar brightening at 17 GHz tracks the area of polar coronal holes and the strength of the polar magnetic field.

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

The paper uses daily 17 GHz observations from the Nobeyama Radioheliograph between 1992 and 2018 to measure long-term changes in polar brightening temperature. It then compares those temperatures with polar coronal hole areas extracted from SDO/AIA EUV images between 2010 and 2018 and with direct measurements of polar magnetic field strength. Strong positive correlations emerge in both cases, and the brightest microwave patches often coincide with small-scale loop structures identified as coronal bright points. A reader would care because these links suggest that ground-based radio data can serve as a continuous probe of polar magnetic activity across multiple solar cycles.

Core claim

Our results show a strong correlation between microwave PB peak temperature and PCH area, as well as with the polar magnetic-field strength. In addition, we found that regions of enhanced microwave emission are frequently associated with small-scale loop structures, consistent with Coronal Bright Points (CBPs), which are often associated with the eruption of jets.

What carries the argument

The measured correlation between 17 GHz polar brightening peak temperature and polar coronal hole area, which connects radio emission to the underlying magnetic structures in the solar poles.

If this is right

Polar brightening temperature can serve as a proxy for monitoring polar coronal hole area when direct EUV observations are unavailable.
Enhanced microwave patches frequently trace coronal bright points, implying that small-scale magnetic activity contributes to the observed radio emission.
Long-term brightening variations mirror the solar cycle through changes in polar magnetic field strength.
Ground-based radio telescopes can extend continuous records of polar region dynamics before the era of space-based EUV imaging.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the correlation is physical rather than coincidental, existing Nobeyama archives could be used to reconstruct polar coronal hole behavior back to the early 1990s.
The repeated association with coronal bright points raises the possibility that microwave polar brightening also records the rate of jet-like eruptions in the poles.
Future work would need to separate the effects of overall solar-cycle phase from any direct causal influence of magnetic field strength on the radio emission.

Load-bearing premise

The correlations reflect a direct physical link between polar brightening, coronal hole area, and magnetic field strength rather than arising from shared solar-cycle modulation or from unaccounted instrumental and selection effects.

What would settle it

Independent measurements during a future solar minimum that show polar coronal hole area changing while 17 GHz polar brightening peak temperature stays constant, or vice versa.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.05671 by Anshu Kumari, Divya Paliwal, M. V. Sunil Krishna, Rohan Bose, Srinjana Routh, Vaibhav Pant.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: (a) 17 GHz microwave map taken by Nobeyama Radioheliograph on 10th October 2017. White boxes highlight the regions of the microwave PBs. (b) Sun centre to limb lines drawn over the microwave map with white dashed lines at 4◦ intervals. (c) Average 60 profiles ±30◦ about the solar south pole. Green solid lines in (b) show the positions from where radial profiles are taken, and the red small line shows the e… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Temporal variation of the polar brightness in the north (a) and south (b) poles. Grey dots denote daily values, orange curves represent smoothed Fourier-filtered data, black curves indicate the long-term background trends, and blue curves show the fitted sinusoidal variations. 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1. Long-term behaviour of the microwave PB and its association with PCH and the polar magnetic field F… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: (a,b) Temporal variation of coronal hole areas at the north and south poles derived from the SPoCA catalogue. Grey dots denote daily values, orange curves represent smoothed Fourier-filtered data, black curves indicate the long-term background trends, and blue curves show the fitted sinusoidal variations. (c,d) Cross-correlation analysis between the microwave PB peak temperature, absolute magnetic field st… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Top Panel: Temporal and Angular variation of the limb brightening. The black dotted horizontal lines show the position of the poles. The white boxes indicate a ±30◦ window at the poles where the microwave PB is prominent. Bottom Panel: Latitudinal variation of limb brightening as a function of time. Magnetic butterfly contours for particular field strength are overplotted for latitudes > |55◦ | in cyan to … view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: (a) NoRH 17 GHz microwave PB contours being overplotted on AIA 193 ˚A data for North (upper panel) and South (lower panel) poles. The green line shows the position of the limb in NoRH data, and the grey line shows the coronal hole boundary from the SPoCA code. The lime arrows indicate microwave PB contours associated with EUV activity, while the white arrows mark regions with no corresponding EUV coronal e… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Polar brightening (PB) observed at microwave frequencies serves as an important probe to study the thermal and magnetic properties in the Sun's polar regions. Building on earlier studies that linked microwave PB to polar faculae, small-scale loops, and the polar coronal holes (PCHs), we present a comprehensive analysis of the long-term behaviour of 17 GHz microwave PB and its relation to polar magnetic field and coronal hole evolution. Using daily Nobeyama Radioheliograph observations spanning 1992 to 2018, we quantify microwave PB peak temperature variations and compare them with the temporal evolution of PCH area extracted from SDO/AIA-based SPoCA coronal hole catalogues during the period 2010-2018. We also examine the correspondence between microwave PB and the polar magnetic field to assess the nature of their association. Our results show a strong correlation between microwave PB peak temperature and PCH area, as well as with the polar magnetic-field strength. In addition, we found that regions of enhanced microwave emission are frequently associated with small-scale loop structures, consistent with Coronal Bright Points (CBPs), which are often associated with the eruption of jets. Overall, this study aims to investigate the impact of coronal holes, polar magnetic fields, and small-scale polar activity on polar brightening observed at 17 GHz and its long-term evolution.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper reports strong correlations from an 8-year overlap but leaves solar-cycle modulation as a plausible alternative driver.

read the letter

The central result here is a claimed strong correlation between 17 GHz polar brightening peak temperature and both polar coronal hole area from SPoCA and polar magnetic field strength, drawn from Nobeyama data 1992-2018 matched against the 2010-2018 SPoCA window. They also note frequent links between enhanced microwave emission and small-scale loops consistent with coronal bright points and jets. That is the punchline for a colleague: useful long-baseline radio temperatures paired with EUV areas, but the overlap is short enough that shared cycle variation could explain the numbers without a direct physical tie. What the work does well is extend prior shorter studies with a 26-year Nobeyama series and a direct quantitative comparison to catalogued PCH areas. The daily radio observations give a clean time series for polar peak temperatures, and tying them to SPoCA and field data adds a concrete observational layer that earlier papers lacked. The association with CBPs and loops is consistent with existing pictures of polar activity. The soft spot is the limited overlap and missing controls. Eight years covers less than one cycle, and both PB temperature and PCH area are known to track cycle phase. The abstract states the goal is to investigate impact but gives no sign of detrending, partial correlations against sunspot number, or autocorrelation checks. Without those, the coefficients remain vulnerable to common modulation or catalog differences between Nobeyama and SDO/AIA. Instrumental extraction choices could also bias the areas and temperatures. This is for solar physicists who track polar radio signatures or need observational bounds on polar heating and wind sources. A reader already working with Nobeyama or SPoCA data will find the time series and correlation plots worth examining, even if the causal claim needs tightening. The paper is coherent on its own terms and shows honest engagement with the datasets, so it deserves a serious referee to evaluate the methods and any cycle handling. I would send it to peer review rather than desk reject, with the expectation that revisions address the detrending question.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes long-term variations in 17 GHz microwave polar brightening (PB) using Nobeyama Radioheliograph observations from 1992–2018. It compares PB peak temperatures to polar coronal hole (PCH) areas derived from SDO/AIA SPoCA catalogs over the 2010–2018 overlap and to polar magnetic-field measurements, reporting strong correlations in both cases. The work also links regions of enhanced microwave emission to small-scale loop structures consistent with coronal bright points and jets, with the overall goal of assessing the impact of coronal holes, polar fields, and small-scale activity on PB evolution.

Significance. If the reported correlations prove robust after appropriate controls, the study would provide useful multi-wavelength constraints on the thermal and magnetic properties of the solar poles, extending earlier links between microwave PB, faculae, and coronal holes. The 27-year Nobeyama time series is a clear strength for examining long-term behavior, and the combination of independent radio, EUV, and magnetogram datasets offers potential for falsifiable tests of polar-activity models.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the claim of a 'strong correlation' between microwave PB peak temperature and PCH area (and separately with polar magnetic-field strength) is presented without any quantitative statistics (correlation coefficient, p-value, uncertainty), error bars, data-exclusion criteria, or description of how solar-cycle trends were handled in the 2010–2018 overlap window.
[Results] Results (correlation analysis over 2010–2018): the eight-year overlap spans less than one full solar cycle and both PB temperature and PCH area are known to vary systematically with cycle phase; the manuscript does not report detrending against sunspot number, partial-correlation analysis, or autocorrelation checks, leaving open the possibility that the observed coefficients arise from shared modulation rather than a direct physical link.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract introduces the abbreviation 'PB' without an explicit first-use definition, although context makes the meaning clear.
[Figure captions / Methods] No table or figure caption in the provided text lists the exact number of daily samples, missing-data handling, or spatial averaging method used to extract PB peak temperatures.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major point below and will revise the paper accordingly to improve statistical rigor and transparency.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim of a 'strong correlation' between microwave PB peak temperature and PCH area (and separately with polar magnetic-field strength) is presented without any quantitative statistics (correlation coefficient, p-value, uncertainty), error bars, data-exclusion criteria, or description of how solar-cycle trends were handled in the 2010–2018 overlap window.

Authors: We agree that the abstract lacks the requested quantitative details. In the revised manuscript we will report the Pearson correlation coefficients, p-values, and uncertainties for the PB–PCH area and PB–polar field relations. We will also specify data-exclusion criteria and clarify how solar-cycle trends were considered within the 2010–2018 window. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] Results (correlation analysis over 2010–2018): the eight-year overlap spans less than one full solar cycle and both PB temperature and PCH area are known to vary systematically with cycle phase; the manuscript does not report detrending against sunspot number, partial-correlation analysis, or autocorrelation checks, leaving open the possibility that the observed coefficients arise from shared modulation rather than a direct physical link.

Authors: The referee correctly identifies the limitation of the eight-year overlap. We will add detrending against sunspot number, partial-correlation analysis to isolate cycle-phase effects, and autocorrelation checks. These controls will be presented in the revised results section, together with a discussion of whether the correlations persist after accounting for shared solar-cycle modulation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely empirical correlations from independent observational datasets

full rationale

The paper reports direct observational comparisons between Nobeyama 17 GHz polar brightening peak temperatures (1992–2018), SPoCA-derived polar coronal hole areas (2010–2018), and polar magnetic field measurements. Central claims are stated as empirical correlations and spatial associations with small-scale loops/CBPs; no derivation, equation, fitted parameter, or first-principles result is presented that reduces to its own inputs by construction. No self-citation load-bearing steps, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes are invoked to justify the results. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on observational correlations drawn from public archives; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented physical entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption 17 GHz microwave emission can be used as a probe of thermal and magnetic properties in the solar polar chromosphere and transition region.
Stated in the opening sentence of the abstract as the basis for treating PB as a diagnostic.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5560 in / 1409 out tokens · 51694 ms · 2026-05-08T05:28:54.928770+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

[1]

E., Archontis, V., & Moraitis, K

Alissandrakis, C. E., Archontis, V., & Moraitis, K. 2025, ApJ, 989, 200, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adf060

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adf060 2025
[2]

N., Gopasiuk, S

Babin, A. N., Gopasiuk, S. I., Efanov, V. A., et al. 1976, Izv. Krymsk. Astrofiz. Obs., 55, 3

1976
[3]

J., & Bergmeir, C

Bandara, K., Hyndman, R. J., & Bergmeir, C. 2025, International Journal of Operational Research, 52, 79, doi: 10.1504/IJOR.2025.143957

work page doi:10.1504/ijor.2025.143957 2025
[4]

2016, International Journal of Forecasting, 32, 303, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2015.07.002

Bergmeir, C., Hyndman, R., & Ben´ ıtez, J. 2016, International Journal of Forecasting, 32, 303, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2015.07.002

work page doi:10.1016/j.ijforecast.2015.07.002 2016
[5]

Dulk, G. A. 1985, ARA&A, 23, 169, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.23.090185.001125

work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.23.090185.001125 1985
[6]

2019, SoPh, 294, 30, doi: 10.1007/s11207-019-1418-6

Fujiki, K., Shibasaki, K., Yashiro, S., et al. 2019, SoPh, 294, 30, doi: 10.1007/s11207-019-1418-6

work page doi:10.1007/s11207-019-1418-6 2019
[7]

2002, A&A, 389, 618, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020666

Riehokainen, A., & Shibasaki, K. 2002, A&A, 389, 618, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020666

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020666 2002
[8]

S., Harvey, J

Golub, L., Krieger, A. S., Harvey, J. W., & Vaiana, G. S. 1977, SoPh, 53, 111, doi: 10.1007/BF02260212

work page doi:10.1007/bf02260212 1977
[9]

2012, ApJL, 750, L42, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/750/2/L42 8

Gopalswamy, N., Yashiro, S., M¨ akel¨ a, P., et al. 2012, ApJL, 750, L42, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/750/2/L42

work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/750/2/l42 2012
[10]

Harvey, K. L. 1985, Australian Journal of Physics, 38, 875, doi: 10.1071/PH850875

work page doi:10.1071/ph850875 1985
[11]

H., & Upton, L

Hathaway, D. H., & Upton, L. A. 2016, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 121, 10,744, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JA023190

work page doi:10.1002/2016ja023190 2016
[12]

Homann, T., Kneer, F., & Makarov, V. I. 1997, Solar Physics, 175, 81, doi: 10.1023/A:1004971002384

work page doi:10.1023/a:1004971002384 1997
[13]

2026, ApJ, 996, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2314 H¨ ardle, W., Horowitz, J., & Kreiss, J.-P

Huang, J., Masuda, S., Tan, B., et al. 2026, ApJ, 996, 55, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2314 H¨ ardle, W., Horowitz, J., & Kreiss, J.-P. 2003, International Statistical Review, 71, 435, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2003.tb00485.x

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2314 2026
[14]

K., & Rout, D

Janardhan, P., Fujiki, K., Ingale, M., Bisoi, S. K., & Rout, D. 2018, A&A, 618, A148, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201832981

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201832981 2018
[15]

2013, ApJ, 776, 122, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/122

Tsuneta, S. 2013, ApJ, 776, 122, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/776/2/122

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/776/2/122 2013
[16]

V., & Minenko, E

Karachik, N. V., & Minenko, E. P. 2025, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 537, 2090, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staf157

work page doi:10.1093/mnras/staf157 2025
[17]

2017, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 50, 125, doi: 10.5303/JKAS.2017.50.4.125

Kim, S., Park, J.-Y., & Kim, Y.-H. 2017, Journal of Korean Astronomical Society, 50, 125, doi: 10.5303/JKAS.2017.50.4.125

work page doi:10.5303/jkas.2017.50.4.125 2017
[18]

R., Title, A

Lemen, J. R., Title, A. M., Akin, D. J., et al. 2012, SoPh, 275, 17, doi: 10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8

work page doi:10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8 2012
[19]

Madjarska, M. S. 2019, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 16, 2, doi: 10.1007/s41116-019-0018-8

work page doi:10.1007/s41116-019-0018-8 2019
[20]

P., & Ehgamberdiev, S

Minenko, E. P., & Ehgamberdiev, S. A. 2021, Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 61, 1128, doi: 10.1134/S0016793221080168

work page doi:10.1134/s0016793221080168 2021
[21]

1994, Proceedings of the IEEE, 82, 705, doi: 10.1109/5.284737

Nakajima, H., Nishio, M., Enome, S., et al. 1994, Proceedings of the IEEE, 82, 705, doi: 10.1109/5.284737

work page doi:10.1109/5.284737 1994
[22]

2019, SoPh, 294, 40, doi: 10.1007/s11207-019-1419-5

Narang, N., Banerjee, D., Chandrashekhar, K., & Pant, V. 2019, SoPh, 294, 40, doi: 10.1007/s11207-019-1419-5

work page doi:10.1007/s11207-019-1419-5 2019
[23]

2020, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 7, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2020.00057

Nindos, A. 2020, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences, 7, doi: 10.3389/fspas.2020.00057

work page doi:10.3389/fspas.2020.00057 2020
[24]

R., White, S

Nindos, A., Kundu, M. R., White, S. M., et al. 1999, ApJ, 527, 415, doi: 10.1086/308072

work page doi:10.1086/308072 1999
[25]

V., Sun, X., Hoeksema, J

Nitta, N. V., Sun, X., Hoeksema, J. T., & DeRosa, M. L. 2014, ApJL, 780, L23, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/780/2/L23 Oliveira e Silva, A. J., Selhorst, C. L., Sim˜ oes, P. J. A., & Gim´ enez de Castro, C. G. 2016, A&A, 592, A91, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527792

work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/780/2/l23 2014
[26]

J., & Bergmeir, C

Petropoulos, F., Hyndman, R. J., & Bergmeir, C. 2018, European Journal of Operational Research, 268, 545, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.01.045

work page doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2018.01.045 2018
[27]

2015, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 12, 7, doi: 10.1007/lrsp-2015-7

Poletto, G. 2015, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 12, 7, doi: 10.1007/lrsp-2015-7

work page doi:10.1007/lrsp-2015-7 2015
[28]

Prabhu, A., Lagg, A., Hirzberger, J., & Solanki, S. K. 2020, A&A, 644, A86, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038704

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038704 2020
[29]

R., Parnell, C

Priest, E. R., Parnell, C. E., & Martin, S. F. 1994, ApJ, 427, 459, doi: 10.1086/174157

work page doi:10.1086/174157 1994
[30]

2001, A&A, 366, 676, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000265

Riehokainen, A., Urpo, S., Valtaoja, E., et al. 2001, A&A, 366, 676, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20000265

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20000265 2001
[31]

Robert, C., William, C., & Irma, T. 1990, J. Off. Stat, 6, 3

1990
[32]

A., Karachik, N

Sattarov, I., Pevtsov, A. A., Karachik, N. V., Sherdanov, C. T., & Tillaboev, A. M. 2010, SoPh, 262, 321, doi: 10.1007/s11207-010-9524-5

work page doi:10.1007/s11207-010-9524-5 2010
[33]

L., Gim´ enez de Castro, C

Selhorst, C. L., Gim´ enez de Castro, C. G., Varela Saraiva, A. C., & Costa, J. E. R. 2010, A&A, 509, A51, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912320

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912320 2010
[34]

L., Silva, A

Selhorst, C. L., Silva, A. V. R., & Costa, J. E. R. 2005a, A&A, 440, 367, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20053083

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20053083
[35]

L., Silva, A

Selhorst, C. L., Silva, A. V. R., & Costa, J. E. R. 2005b, A&A, 433, 365, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20042043

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20042043
[36]

2003, A&A, 401, 1143, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030071

Shibasaki, K. 2003, A&A, 401, 1143, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20030071

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030071 2003
[37]

1998, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

Shibasaki, K. 1998, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 140, Synoptic Solar Physics, ed. K. S. Balasubramaniam, J. W. Harvey, & D. M. Rabin (San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific), 373–380. https: //articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1998ASPC..140..373S

1998
[38]

2013, PASJ, 65, S17, doi: 10.1093/pasj/65.sp1.S17 12

Shibasaki, K. 2013, PASJ, 65, S17, doi: 10.1093/pasj/65.sp1.S17 12

work page doi:10.1093/pasj/65.sp1.s17 2013
[39]

2009, ApJL, 706, L145, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/L145

Shimojo, M., & Tsuneta, S. 2009, ApJL, 706, L145, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/706/1/L145

work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/706/1/l145 2009
[40]

2008, ApJ, 688, 1374, doi: 10.1086/592226

Tsuneta, S., Ichimoto, K., Katsukawa, Y., et al. 2008, ApJ, 688, 1374, doi: 10.1086/592226

work page doi:10.1086/592226 2008
[41]

2014, A&A, 561, A29, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321243

Verbeeck, C., Delouille, V., Mampaey, B., & De Visscher, R. 2014, A&A, 561, A29, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321243

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321243 2014
[42]

1998, ApJL, 501, L145, doi: 10.1086/311445

Wang, Y.-M. 1998, ApJL, 501, L145, doi: 10.1086/311445

work page doi:10.1086/311445 1998