Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 6 minor 46 references

Jupiter's UV auroral response to a magnetospheric compression event

T0 review · 1 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that Jupiter's ultraviolet aurora can be driven to 12 terawatts by a solar wind shock compressing the magnetosphere, based on Juno's simultaneous measurements of the magnetopause location and the full southern aurora…

desk verdict A genuinely new dataset combination and a strong single-event case study, but the causal link to the modeled shock needs a real timing error budget before the conclusion carries much weight. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.20461 v1 pith:5ADUFNXJ submitted 2025-05-26 astro-ph.EP

R. S. Giles , T. K. Greathouse , R. W. Ebert , W. S. Kurth , C. K. Louis , M. F. Vogt , B. Bonfond , D. Grodent
show 7 more authors
J.-C. Gérard G. R. Gladstone J. A. Kammer V. Hue R. J. Wilson S. J. Bolton J. E. P. Connerney
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords JupiterultravioletauroramagnetosphericcompressioninterplanetaryshocksolarwinddynamicpressureJunomissionmagnetopausecrossingauroralpower
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

Using Juno's unique ability to measure both the size of Jupiter's magnetosphere and the total ultraviolet auroral power at the same time, this paper documents an extreme magnetospheric compression on December 6-7 2022 and argues that the accompanying auroral brightening to 12 terawatts, six times the baseline, was caused by an interplanetary shock compressing the magnetosphere. The peak aurora occurred about four hours after the peak compression at the spacecraft, and the power returned to baseline while the magnetosphere was still expanding, a timing the authors interpret as favoring compression-driven rather than expansion-driven mechanisms. The interpretation is consistent with recent global MHD simulations predicting a prompt, short-lived auroral enhancement after a solar wind compression onset. If the causal chain holds, it shows that external forcing by the solar wind can produce some of the strongest UV auroral emissions observed at Jupiter, complementing internally driven brightening events.

What carries the argument

The dataset itself is the central mechanism: Juno's extended-mission orbit places apojove on the dusk flank at a southern latitude, so the magnetopause and bow shock crossings are detected in situ while UVS simultaneously views the entire southern aurora during synoptic observations. The compression state is measured by abrupt changes in JADE ion flux and the disappearance of trapped continuum radiation in Waves data at boundary crossings, and the crossing locations are converted to solar wind dynamic pressures using the empirical magnetopause and bow shock models of Joy et al. (2002). The auroral response is measured by integrating UVS's 155-162 nm H2 emissions and multiplying by 8.1 to obtain the total emitted power, producing a time series free of rotational modulation. The load-bearing comparison is the timing: peak compression at the spacecraft at roughly 16:00-18:00 on December 6, bKOM radio peak at 20:00, and UV auroral peak at 22:00, a delay of about four hours that separates compression-driven from expansion-driven scenarios and is matched to the first 'up' of the up-down-up response predicted by the Feng et al. (2022) global MHD model.

What would settle it

A recalculation of the solar wind dynamic pressure implied by the magnetopause and bow shock crossings using the polar-flattened magnetopause model of Ranquist et al. (2020), instead of the unflattened Joy et al. (2002) model, that yields pressures below the 90th percentile of the Joy et al. distribution would remove the 'extreme compression' designation and weaken the coincidence argument that links the aurora to the shock.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the December 6-7 2022 auroral brightening was externally driven: a powerful interplanetary shock compressed Jupiter's magnetosphere, and that compression, rather than the subsequent expansion, triggered a 12 TW ultraviolet aurora. The evidence is a simultaneously measured compression state and auroral power from a single spacecraft: Juno crossed the magnetopause at 13:25 on December 6 at 72 R_J and re-entered at 13:15 on December 7 at 68 R_J, with two bow shock crossings in between, while UVS synoptic observations tracked the full southern aurora without rotation modulation. The inferred solar wind dynamic pressures from the boundary crossings, 0.80-0.95 nPa at the magnetopause and ~1.5 nPa at the bow shock, all exceed the 90th percentile of the Joy et al. (2002) distribution, indicating an extreme compression. The UV aurora rose from a ~2 TW baseline to a 12 TW peak at ~22:00 on December 6, with the bKOM radio emission peaking at ~20:00, roughly four hours after the maximum compression measured at the spacecraft. The authors connect this to the SWMF-OH MHD prediction of the strongest solar wind dynamic pressure of the Juno era (2.1 nPa peak), accepting an 18-30 hour model timing error so that the shock's arrival aligns with the compression onset, and conclude the timing matches the compression-driven 'up' phase of the Feng et al. (2022) global MHD response.

Load-bearing premise

The causal chain from solar wind shock to auroral brightening rests on accepting that the SWMF-OH model predicted the shock's arrival 18-30 hours too late, so the modeled 2.1 nPa pressure peak on December 7 actually occurred on December 6; if the model's timing is accurate, the shock arrived after the compression and the aurora had already begun.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the interpretation is correct, Jupiter's ultraviolet aurora can be driven by solar wind shocks to at least 12 TW, a factor of six above baseline, placing external forcing among the strongest observed auroral emissions.
  • The observed timing, with the auroral peak about four hours after peak compression and a return to baseline during the expansion phase, favors compression-driven mechanisms over the classical expansion-driven picture and aligns with the Feng et al. (2022) MHD prediction.
  • The study demonstrates that Juno's extended-mission orbit can simultaneously measure the magnetopause location and the full southern aurora without rotation modulation, enabling future statistical studies of the relationship between compression state and UV auroral power.
  • Because the interplanetary shock, the extreme compression, and the bright aurora are each individually rare, their simultaneous occurrence supports a causal chain external to Jupiter, though the authors caution that not all brightening events need share this mechanism.
  • The concurrent bKOM radio enhancement, consistent with prior Juno results, indicates the auroral response to compression spans both ultraviolet and radio wavelengths within the same event.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The causal conclusion implicitly assumes the SWMF-OH model's predicted shock arrival is early by 18-30 hours, even though the modeled 2.1 nPa peak falls after both the compression onset and the auroral peak; a multi-event calibration of the model's timing error at Jupiter's distance would directly test this assumption.
  • The inferred dynamic pressures from the Joy et al. (2002) model are acknowledged overestimates because the crossings lie at high southern latitude where polar flattening shrinks the boundary; recalculating with the Ranquist et al. (2020) flattened model could lower the pressures, but the observed inward motion of the magnetopause past 68 R_J remains evidence of a strong compression.
  • The roughly four-hour delay between peak compression at the dusk flank and peak aurora could be interpreted as either a delayed response to nose/flank compression or a near-instantaneous response to tail compression roughly 100 R_J tailward; a survey of multiple events measuring how the delay varies with magnetospheric size or solar wind speed could distinguish these.
  • If the mechanism generalizes, any strong solar wind pressure pulse should produce a short-lived auroral enhancement a few hours after compression onset at other magnetized planets, a prediction that could be tested with synoptic auroral monitoring at Saturn or the ice giants.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a case study of Jupiter's magnetosphere and UV aurora during December 6-7, 2022, using Juno data. Juno was near apojove and crossed the magnetopause twice (at 13:25 Dec 6 at 72 R_J and 13:15 Dec 7 at 68 R_J), with an intervening excursion through the magnetosheath and a brief solar wind interval. The authors combine these in situ crossings with continuous UVS synoptic observations of the southern aurora, which show a brightening to 12 TW (about six times baseline) peaking at 22:00 Dec 6, and a simultaneous bKOM radio enhancement. They attribute the compression and auroral brightening to an interplanetary shock predicted by the SWMF-OH MHD model, which shows a dynamic pressure peak of 2.1 nPa on Dec 7 13:00. Acknowledging a timing offset, they argue the shock likely arrived 18-30 hours earlier than modeled, and they use the ~4-hour delay between the measured compression peak and the UV peak to argue for compression-driven rather than expansion-driven auroral excitation, consistent with the Feng et al. (2022) MHD predictions.

Significance. If the causal association holds, this is a valuable case study that exploits a rare observational configuration: direct measurement of the magnetopause/compression state and quasi-continuous, rotation-unmodulated measurement of the total UV auroral power from the same spacecraft. The paper contains no fitted parameters tuned to its own data: the compression is inferred from boundary crossings using standard external models, the auroral power is a direct measurement, and the shock is an independent MHD prediction. The ~4-hour delay between compression and auroral peak, and the return of the aurora to baseline before expansion completes, provide a timing constraint that discriminates between competing mechanisms. The paper is candid about the limitations of the solar wind model and the ambiguity between compression- and expansion-driven scenarios, and it positions the result within the broader debate about external versus internal drivers of Jovian auroral variability.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 3.2, Figure 2d] A minor but notable issue is the abstract and Plain Language Summary describe the spacecraft as being at 70 R_J during the event, while the two magnetopause crossings are at 72 R_J and 68 R_J (Section 3.1). This is a presentation inconsistency that should be corrected for clarity.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and Section 3.1] The abstract states 'when Juno was a distance of 70 R_J from Jupiter', but the two magnetopause crossings are at 72 R_J and 68 R_J; please specify which value is meant (e.g., 'about 70 R_J' or the exact values).
  2. [Figure 2 caption] The caption for Figure 2 does not define the grey shaded region in panel (g); please add a sentence specifying that this region indicates the time interval shown in panels (a)-(f).
  3. [Section 2.3] The statement in Section 2.3 that 'there is negligible periodicity due to the planet's rotation' after October 2022 would benefit from a quantitative justification (e.g., citing the maximum residual modulation based on Figure S2) rather than relying solely on the figure.
  4. [Author list] In the author list, 'M. F. V ogt' contains a stray space; it should read 'M. F. Vogt'.
  5. [Section 4, bullet list] In the bullet list in Section 4, the final bullet states the 'peak auroral response occurred at 20:00-22:00 on December 6', but the text distinguishes the bKOM peak at 20:00 and the UV peak at 22:00; please clarify which quantity is meant in the bullet.
  6. [Section 3.3] The sentence 'the peak observed auroral brightness at 22:00 likely occurred within a few hours of the maximum compression' is vague; given the stated peak compression at 16:00-18:00, the delay is 4-6 hours, which is more than 'a few hours' and should be stated precisely.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the UV auroral power, the magnetopause-crossing compression state, and the SWMF-OH shock prediction are independent measurements/model outputs, and the causal conclusion is an inference from coincidence rather than a self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain involves three independent elements: UVS-measured H2 auroral power (using the external Bonfond et al. 2017 conversion), compression inferred from JADE/Waves magnetopause and bow-shock crossings using the Joy et al. (2002) boundary models, and the SWMF-OH MHD prediction of an interplanetary shock. None of these is fitted to the December 2022 event or to the others. The SWMF-OH result is propagated from Earth-side solar wind observations and is not adjusted to match the observed compression or the 12 TW auroral power. Section 3.2 explicitly notes that the modeled peak pressure occurs after the observed compression and that an 18-30 hour earlier arrival would be required, appealing to the independent Zieger and Hansen (2008) timing-validation statistics. That timing mismatch is a genuine weakness in the causal argument, but it is an unquantified model-uncertainty issue, not a circular reduction. Self-citations appear (e.g., Giles 2025 dataset, Gladstone et al. 2017 baseline, Louis et al. 2023 bKOM comparisons), but they are data-availability and contextual citations, not load-bearing premises that presuppose the conclusion. The paper does not rename a known result, import a uniqueness theorem from its authors, or fit a parameter that is then called a prediction. The central inference is a coincidence-based association supported by an external MHD simulation, so no circular step can be quoted.

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

The paper's claims rest on external empirical models (Joy et al. 2002), an MHD propagation model (SWMF-OH), and a literature calibration factor, rather than new free parameters or entities. The main fragility is the assumed timing relationship between the modeled shock and the measured compression.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Joy et al. (2002) empirical magnetopause and bow shock models, with polar flattening from Ranquist et al. (2020), can be used to convert the observed crossing locations into estimates of solar wind dynamic pressure.
    Used in Section 3.1 to compute P_D values of 0.80-1.52 nPa; the authors note these may be overestimates at southern latitudes, so the compression inference rests partly on this model.
  • domain assumption SWMF-OH MHD model propagation of solar wind from Earth to Jupiter is accurate enough that an 18-30 hour early arrival of the predicted shock is plausible.
    Section 3.2: the peak predicted P_D (2.1 nPa) occurs at 13:00 Dec 7, after the observed compression and auroral peak; the authors rely on Zieger and Hansen (2008) validation to absorb this discrepancy.
  • domain assumption The UVS total H2 power conversion, integrating 155-162 nm and multiplying by 8.1 (Bonfond et al. 2017), gives an accurate total auroral power.
    Section 2.3; the 12 TW peak and 2 TW baseline depend on this calibration factor.
  • domain assumption The southern aurora synoptic observations have negligible rotational modulation, so the time series represents total auroral power.
    Section 2.3; supported by Figure S2, but no quantitative error budget is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Jupiter's UV auroral response to a magnetospheric compression event." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5ADUFNXJ

@misc{pith2026250520461,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Jupiter's UV auroral response to a magnetospheric compression event},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5ADUFNXJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.20461}
}
abstract

The highly elliptical polar orbit of the Juno mission provides a unique opportunity to simultaneously measure the compression state of Jupiter's magnetosphere and the total power emitted by the planet's ultraviolet aurora, using a single spacecraft. This allows us to study how Jupiter's aurora respond to a compression event. In this paper, we present a case study of an extreme compression event that occurred on December 6-7 2022 when Juno was a distance of 70 R$_{J}$ from Jupiter. This extreme compression was accompanied by a very large increase in the ultraviolet auroral emissions to 12 TW, a factor of six higher than the baseline level. This event coincided with the predicted arrival of a powerful interplanetary shock, which was expected to cause the largest increase in the solar wind dynamic pressure seen thus far during the Juno mission. The simultaneous occurrence of the interplanetary shock, the extreme compression and the bright ultraviolet aurora suggests that in this case, the auroral brightening was caused by the solar wind shock compressing the magnetosphere.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.20461 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The orbital geometry of the Juno spacecraft during the compression event in De￾cember 2022, in Jupiter-Sun-Orbit (JSO) co-ordinates. (a) is projected onto the z = 0 plane and (b) is projected onto the x = 0 plane. The spacecraft trajectory in late 2022 is shown by the solid black lines and the spacecraft trajectory in late 2016 is shown by the dashed black lines. Jupiter is represented by the yellow point and the re… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. In situ and remote sensing observations during the compression event on Decem￾ber 6–7. (a) Ion differential energy flux measured by JADE. (b) Electric wave spectral density measured by the Waves experiment. (c) The inferred solar wind dynamic pressure, based on the location of the spacecraft at each magnetopause and bow shock crossing (Joy et al., 2002); this is a proxy for the strength of the compression. (d) The s… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    apacite url apacite =6pt Acknowledgments. 6pt 1sp \@dates Received \@recvdate\@empty\@rcvaccrule \@recvdate \@revisedate\@empty ; revised \@revisedate; \@accptdate\@empty \@revisedate\@empty; accepted \@accptdate \@pubdate\@empty. ; published \@pubdate. -2pt \@authaddrs @list\@empty =.15in @list 1sp @list =9pt plus 2pt minus 6pt \@sluginfo width 4pc =3000...

    2001

  2. [2]

    gc" journal option for G-Cubed Nov 3, 2003 M Kelly, fixed noindent in subsubsubsection titles and for all sections in rog option Oct 2, 2003 M Kelly, added

    \@ifstar \@figbox \@figbox \@figbox#1#2#3 to !#1! #3 [#1][c] !#2!#3 \@tempdima#2 \@tempdima by2 \@tempdima by- \@tempdima by- \@height\@tempdima\@depth\@tempdima\@width @ to @ #3 Bib ??? ??? ??? =0 =0 = @figure=0 @table=0 #1 --#1 -24pt -2ex #1 0= #1 to 0 #1 I NDEX T ERMS: #1 #1 Citation: #1 Feb 9, 2009 Changed name and references to name from agu2001 to a...

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    , Wilson, R J

    allegrini22 APACrefauthors Allegrini, F. , Wilson, R J. , Ebert, R W. \ Hanley, J. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Juno J/SW Jovian Auroral Distribution Def V1.0 [Dataset], JNO-J/SW-JAD-5-CALIBRATED-V1.0 . Juno J/SW Jovian Auroral Distribution Def V1.0 [Dataset], JNO-J/SW-JAD-5-CALIBRATED-V1.0 . NASA Planetary Data System . APACrefDOI doi:10.17189/2775-4623 APACrefDOI

    work page doi:10.17189/2775-4623 2022

  4. [4]

    , Lunine, J

    bolton17 APACrefauthors Bolton, S J. , Lunine, J. , Stevenson, D. , Connerney, J E P. , Levin, S. , Owen, T C. others APACrefauthors \ 2017 . The Juno Mission The Juno Mission . Space Science Reviews 213 1-4 5--37

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    , Gladstone, G R

    bonfond17 APACrefauthors Bonfond, B. , Gladstone, G R. , Grodent, D. , Greathouse, T K. , Versteeg, M H. , Hue, V. others APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Morphology of the UV aurorae Jupiter during Juno's first perijove observations Morphology of the UV aurorae Jupiter during Juno's first perijove observations . Geophysical Research Letters 44 10 4463--4471

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    , Grodent, D

    bonfond12 APACrefauthors Bonfond, B. , Grodent, D. , G \'e rard, J C. , Stallard, T. , Clarke, J T. , Yoneda, M. Gustin, J. APACrefauthors \ 2012 . Auroral evidence of Io's control over the magnetosphere of Jupiter Auroral evidence of Io's control over the magnetosphere of Jupiter . Geophysical Research Letters 39 1 L01105

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    , Yao, Z H

    bonfond21 APACrefauthors Bonfond, B. , Yao, Z H. , Gladstone, G R. , Grodent, D. , G \'e rard, J C. , Matar, J. others APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Are dawn storms Jupiter's auroral substorms? Are dawn storms Jupiter's auroral substorms? AGU advances 2 1 e2020AV000275

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    , Nichols, J

    clarke09 APACrefauthors Clarke, J T. , Nichols, J. , G \'e rard, J C. , Grodent, D. , Hansen, K C. , Kurth, W. others APACrefauthors \ 2009 . Response of Jupiter's and Saturn's auroral activity to the solar wind Response of Jupiter's and Saturn's auroral activity to the solar wind . Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 114 A5

    work page 2009

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    \ Bunce, E J

    cowley03 APACrefauthors Cowley, S W H. \ Bunce, E J. APACrefauthors \ 2003 . Modulation of Jovian middle magnetosphere currents and auroral precipitation by solar wind-induced compressions and expansions of the magnetosphere: Initial response and steady state Modulation of Jov...

    2003

  2. [10]

    , Nichols, J D

    cowley07 APACrefauthors Cowley, S W H. , Nichols, J D. \ Andrews, D J. APACrefauthors \ 2007 . Modulation of Jupiter's plasma flow, polar currents, and auroral precipitation by solar wind-induced compressions and expansions of the magnetosphere: A simple theoretical model Modu...

    2007

  3. [11]

    , Zhang, B

    feng22 APACrefauthors Feng, E. , Zhang, B. , Yao, Z. , Delamere, P A. , Zheng, Z. , Brambles, O J. Sorathia, K A. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Dynamic Jovian magnetosphere responses to enhanced solar wind ram pressure: Implications for auroral activities Dynamic jovian magnetospher...

    2022

  4. [12]

    APACrefauthors \ 2025

    giles25_data APACrefauthors Giles, R S. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Jupiter's UV auroral response to a magnetospheric compression event [Dataset] . Jupiter's UV auroral response to a magnetospheric compression event [Dataset] . Zenodo . APACrefDOI doi:10.5281/zenodo.13362482 APACrefDOI

    2025 doi

  5. [13]

    , Persyn, S C

    gladstone17 APACrefauthors Gladstone, G R. , Persyn, S C. , Eterno, J S. , Walther, B C. , Slater, D C. , Davis, M W. others APACrefauthors \ 2017 . The ultraviolet spectrograph on NASA's Juno mission The ultraviolet spectrograph on NASA's Juno mission . Space Science Reviews ...

    2017

  6. [14]

    , Versteeg, M H

    gladstone17b APACrefauthors Gladstone, G R. , Versteeg, M H. , Greathouse, T K. , Hue, V. , Davis, M W. , G \'e rard, J C. others APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Juno-UVS approach observations of Jupiter's auroras Juno-UVS approach observations of Jupiter's auroras . Geophysical Resea...

    2017

  7. [15]

    , Clarke, J T

    grodent03 APACrefauthors Grodent, D. , Clarke, J T. , Kim, J. , Waite, J H. \ Cowley, S W H. APACrefauthors \ 2003 . Jupiter's main auroral oval observed with HST-STIS Jupiter's main auroral oval observed with HST-STIS . Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 108 A11 1389

    2003

  8. [16]

    , Kurth, W S

    gurnett02 APACrefauthors Gurnett, D A. , Kurth, W S. , Hospodarsky, G B. , Persoon, A. , Zarka, P. , Lecacheux, A. others APACrefauthors \ 2002 . Control of Jupiter's radio emission and aurorae by the solar wind Control of Jupiter's radio emission and aurorae by the solar wind...

    2002

  9. [17]

    , Kurth, W S

    gurnett80 APACrefauthors Gurnett, D A. , Kurth, W S. \ Scarf, F L. APACrefauthors \ 1980 . The structure of the Jovian magnetotail from plasma wave observations The structure of the Jovian magnetotail from plasma wave observations . Geophysical Research Letters 7 1 53--56

    1980

  10. [18]

    , Kurth, W S

    hospodarsky17 APACrefauthors Hospodarsky, G B. , Kurth, W S. , Bolton, S J. , Allegrini, F. , Clark, G B. , Connerney, J E P. others APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Jovian bow shock and magnetopause encounters by the Juno spacecraft Jovian bow shock and magnetopause encounters by the ...

    2017

  11. [19]

    \ Arridge, C S

    jackman11 APACrefauthors Jackman, C M. \ Arridge, C S. APACrefauthors \ 2011 . Solar cycle effects on the dynamics of Jupiter's and Saturn's magnetospheres Solar cycle effects on the dynamics of Jupiter's and Saturn's magnetospheres . Solar Physics 274 481--502

    2011

  12. [20]

    , Kivelson, M G

    joy02 APACrefauthors Joy, S P. , Kivelson, M G. , Walker, R J. , Khurana, K K. , Russell, C T. \ Ogino, T. APACrefauthors \ 2002 . Probabilistic models of the Jovian magnetopause and bow shock locations Probabilistic models of the Jovian magnetopause and bow shock locations . ...

    2002

  13. [21]

    , Lumme, E

    kilpua15 APACrefauthors Kilpua, E K J. , Lumme, E. , Andreeova, K. , Isavnin, A. \ Koskinen, H E J. APACrefauthors \ 2015 . Properties and drivers of fast interplanetary shocks near the orbit of the Earth (1995--2013) Properties and drivers of fast interplanetary shocks near t...

    2015

  14. [22]

    , Badman, S V

    kimura15 APACrefauthors Kimura, T. , Badman, S V. , Tao, C. , Yoshioka, K. , Murakami, G. , Yamazaki, A. others APACrefauthors \ 2015 . Transient internally driven aurora at Jupiter discovered by Hisaki and the Hubble Space Telescope Transient internally driven aurora at Jupit...

    2015

  15. [23]

    , Hiraki, Y

    kimura18 APACrefauthors Kimura, T. , Hiraki, Y. , Tao, C. , Tsuchiya, F. , Delamere, P. , Yoshioka, K. others APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Response of Jupiter's aurora to plasma mass loading rate monitored by the Hisaki satellite during volcanic eruptions at Io Response of Jupiter'...

    2018

  16. [24]

    , Kimura, T

    kita16 APACrefauthors Kita, H. , Kimura, T. , Tao, C. , Tsuchiya, F. , Misawa, H. , Sakanoi, T. others APACrefauthors \ 2016 . Characteristics of solar wind control on Jovian UV auroral activity deciphered by long-term Hisaki EXCEED observations: Evidence of preconditioning of...

    2016

  17. [25]

    , Hospodarsky, G B

    kurth17 APACrefauthors Kurth, W S. , Hospodarsky, G B. , Kirchner, D L. , Mokrzycki, B T. , Averkamp, T F. , Robison, W T. Zarka, P. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . The Juno Waves Investigation The Juno Waves Investigation . Space Science Reviews 213 347--392

    2017

  18. [26]

    \ Piker, C W

    kurth24 APACrefauthors Kurth, W S. \ Piker, C W. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Juno E/J/S/SS Waves Calibrated Survey Full Resolution V2.0 [Dataset] , JNO-E/J/SS-WAV-3-CDR-SRVFULL-V2.0. Juno E/J/S/SS Waves Calibrated Survey Full Resolution V2.0 [Dataset] , JNO-E/J/SS-WAV-3-CDR-SRVFUL...

    2024 doi

  19. [27]

    , Jackman, C M

    louis23 APACrefauthors Louis, C K. , Jackman, C M. , Hospodarsky, G. , O'Kane Hackett, A. , Devon-Hurley, E. , Zarka, P. others APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Effect of a magnetospheric compression on Jovian radio emissions: In situ case study using Juno data Effect of a magnetospher...

    2023

  20. [28]

    , Zarka, P

    louis21 APACrefauthors Louis, C K. , Zarka, P. , Dabidin, K. , Lampson, P A. , Magalhaes, F P. , Boudouma, A. Cecconi, B. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Latitudinal beaming of Jupiter's radio emissions from Juno/Waves flux density measurements Latitudinal beaming of Jupiter's radio e...

    2021

  21. [29]

    , Alexander, N

    mccomas17 APACrefauthors McComas, D J. , Alexander, N. , Allegrini, F. , Bagenal, F. , Beebe, C. , Clark, G. others APACrefauthors \ 2017 . The Jovian auroral distributions experiment (JADE) on the Juno mission to Jupiter The Jovian auroral distributions experiment (JADE) on t...

    2017

  22. [30]

    , Badman, S V

    nichols17 APACrefauthors Nichols, J D. , Badman, S V. , Bagenal, F. , Bolton, S J. , Bonfond, B. , Bunce, E J. others APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Response of Jupiter's auroras to conditions in the interplanetary medium as measured by the Hubble Space Telescope and Juno Response of...

    2017

  23. [31]

    , Bunce, E J

    nichols07 APACrefauthors Nichols, J D. , Bunce, E J. , Clarke, J T. , Cowley, S W H. , G \'e rard, J C. , Grodent, D. \ Pryor, W R. APACrefauthors \ 2007 . Response of Jupiter's UV auroras to interplanetary conditions as observed by the Hubble Space Telescope during the Cassin...

    2007

  24. [32]

    , Moore, L

    odonoghue25 APACrefauthors O'Donoghue, J. , Moore, L. , Melin, H. , Stallard, T. , Kurth, W. , Owens, M. others APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Sub-auroral heating at Jupiter following a solar wind compression Sub-auroral heating at Jupiter following a solar wind compression . Geophys...

    2025

  25. [33]

    , Chagnon, G

    prange01 APACrefauthors Prang \'e , R. , Chagnon, G. , Kivelson, M G. , Livengood, T A. \ Kurth, W. APACrefauthors \ 2001 . Temporal monitoring of Jupiter's auroral activity with IUE during the Galileo mission. Implications for magnetospheric processes Temporal monitoring of J...

    2001

  26. [34]

    , Stewart, A I F

    pryor05 APACrefauthors Pryor, W R. , Stewart, A I F. , Esposito, L W. , McClintock, W E. , Colwell, J E. , Jouchoux, A J. others APACrefauthors \ 2005 . Cassini UVIS observations of Jupiter's auroral variability Cassini UVIS observations of Jupiter's auroral variability . Icar...

    2005

  27. [35]

    , Bagenal, F

    ranquist20 APACrefauthors Ranquist, D A. , Bagenal, F. \ Wilson, R J. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Polar flattening of Jupiter's magnetosphere Polar flattening of Jupiter's magnetosphere . Geophysical Research Letters 47 16 e2020GL089818

    2020

  28. [36]

    , Bagenal, F

    ranquist19 APACrefauthors Ranquist, D A. , Bagenal, F. , Wilson, R J. , Hospodarsky, G. , Ebert, R W. , Allegrini, F. others APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Survey of Jupiter's dawn magnetosheath using Juno Survey of Jupiter's dawn magnetosheath using Juno . Journal of Geophysical Res...

    2019

  29. [37]

    , Gurnett, D A

    scarf79 APACrefauthors Scarf, F L. , Gurnett, D A. \ Kurth, W S. APACrefauthors \ 1979 . Jupiter plasma wave observations: An initial Voyager 1 overview Jupiter plasma wave observations: An initial Voyager 1 overview . Science 204 4396 991--995

    1979

  30. [38]

    , Greathouse, T K

    sinclair23 APACrefauthors Sinclair, J A. , Greathouse, T K. , Giles, R S. , Lacy, J. , Moses, J. , Hue, V. others APACrefauthors \ 2023 . A high spatial and spectral resolution study of Jupiter's mid-infrared auroral emissions and their response to a solar wind compression A h...

    2023

  31. [39]

    \ Kivelson, M G

    southwood01 APACrefauthors Southwood, D J. \ Kivelson, M G. APACrefauthors \ 2001 . A new perspective concerning the influence of the solar wind on the Jovian magnetosphere A new perspective concerning the influence of the solar wind on the Jovian magnetosphere . Journal of Ge...

    2001

  32. [40]

    , Van der Holst, B

    toth12 APACrefauthors T \'o th, G. , Van der Holst, B. , Sokolov, I V. , De Zeeuw, D L. , Gombosi, T I. , Fang, F. others APACrefauthors \ 2012 . Adaptive numerical algorithms in space weather modeling Adaptive numerical algorithms in space weather modeling . Journal of Comput...

    2012

  33. [41]

    APACrefauthors \ 2014

    trantham14 APACrefauthors Trantham, B. APACrefauthors \ 2014 . Juno J UVS Reduced Data Record V1.0, JNO-J-UVS-3-RDR-V1.0 . Juno J UVS Reduced Data Record V1.0, JNO-J-UVS-3-RDR-V1.0 . Planetary Data System . APACrefDOI doi:10.17189/c32j-7r56 APACrefDOI

    2014 doi

  34. [42]

    , Branduardi-Raymont, G

    wibisono20 APACrefauthors Wibisono, A D. , Branduardi-Raymont, G. , Dunn, W R. , Coates, A J. , Weigt, D M. , Jackman, C M. others APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Temporal and spectral studies by XMM-Newton of Jupiter's X-ray auroras during a compression event Temporal and spectral st...

    2020

  35. [43]

    , Bagenal, F

    wilson18 APACrefauthors Wilson, R J. , Bagenal, F. , Valek, P W. , McComas, D J. , Allegrini, F. , Ebert, R W. Thomsen, M F. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Solar wind properties during Juno's approach to Jupiter : Data analysis and resulting plasma properties utilizing a 1-D forward ...

    2018

  36. [44]

    , Bonfond, B

    yao22 APACrefauthors Yao, Z H. , Bonfond, B. , Grodent, D. , Chan \'e , E. , Dunn, W R. , Kurth, W S. others APACrefauthors \ 2022 . On the Relation Between Auroral Morphologies and Compression Conditions of Jupiter's Magnetopause: Observations From Juno and the Hubble Space T...

    2022

  37. [45]

    \ Hansen, K C

    zieger08 APACrefauthors Zieger, B. \ Hansen, K C. APACrefauthors \ 2008 . Statistical validation of a solar wind propagation model from 1 to 10 AU Statistical validation of a solar wind propagation model from 1 to 10 AU . Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 113 A8

    2008

  38. [46]

    , Toth, G

    zieger15 APACrefauthors Zieger, B. , Toth, G. , Opher, M. \ Gombosi, T I. APACrefauthors \ 2015 . Solar Wind Prediction at Pluto During the New Horizons Flyby: Results From a Two-Dimensional Multi-fluid MHD Model of the Outer Heliosphere Solar wind prediction at Pluto during t...

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.