Averaging Effects on the Solar Wind Alfven Mach Number: Implications for Switchbacks and Alfven Transition

David Ruffolo; Francesco Pecora; Jiaming Wang; Joshua Goodwill; Manuel E. Cuesta; Orlando Romeo; Panisara Thepthong; Peera Pongkitiwanichakul; Rayta Pradata; Rohit Chhiber

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 13 references

Averaging Effects on the Solar Wind Alfven Mach Number: Implications for Switchbacks and Alfven Transition

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · 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 brief super-Alfvénic excursions near the Sun that host magnetic switchbacks are physically real, and that long averaging windows erase them by using a background incompatible with the local correlation time.

desk verdict Useful sensitivity study on PSP Mach-number averaging; the main statistics hold up, but the paper's sharpest claim about a specific super-Alfvenic excursion depends on an untested postulate about correlation-scale matching. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.28773 v1 pith:A7KUWGVF submitted 2026-07-30 astro-ph.SR physics.space-ph

Joshua Goodwill , Subash Adhikari , Francesco Pecora , Rayta Pradata , Jiaming Wang , Sujan Prasad Gautam , Manuel E. Cuesta , Orlando Romeo

show 5 more authors

David Ruffolo Panisara Thepthong Peera Pongkitiwanichakul Rohit Chhiber William H. Matthaeus

This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.SRphysics.space-ph

keywords AlfvénMachnumbersolarwindParkerProbeswitchbackstransitioncorrelationtimeaveragingintervalmagneticfluctuationenergy

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 tackles the question of how long an averaging window should be when computing the Alfvén Mach number—the ratio of solar-wind flow speed to the speed of magnetic perturbations—from spacecraft data near the Sun. Using measurements from encounters 1–19, the authors show that large-scale statistics, such as the distributions of Mach number, sub-Alfvénic interval durations, and the shape of magnetic fluctuation energy across the Alfvén transition, barely change when the window ranges from one minute to ten hours. The decisive finding is at the level of individual events: a brief super-Alfvénic excursion during encounter 14 that contains a magnetic switchback survives averaging windows of minutes to an hour but is erased by 5-hour and 10-hour averages. Because the local correlation time there is only about four to five minutes, the authors argue that the excursion is physically relevant and that long windows suppress real local dynamics. If right, this means the Alfvén transition is punctuated by short-lived super-Alfvénic patches tied to switchbacks, and studies of switchback formation should use correlation-scale backgrounds.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the rolling mean (boxcar) average window τ, applied to the radial flow speed, the magnetic field magnitude, and the density to form the Mach number ⟨M_A⟩_τ = ⟨V_R⟩_τ / ⟨V_A⟩_τ. The second key object is the switchback parameter Z_τ = ½(1 − cos(B·⟨B⟩_τ / |B||⟨B⟩_τ|)), which flags polarity-reversed magnetic deflections. The third is the e-folding correlation time τ_c, obtained from the autocorrelation of the magnetic field; the paper uses τ_c as the physically motivated scale for the background. The argument works by comparing τ_c (minutes) with the averaging window and showing that windows many times larger than τ_c remove real, short-lived excursions.

What would settle it

Compute the Alfvén Mach number at the 12-11 20:45 switchback using a window matched to the measured e-folding correlation time (~4–5 min) rather than 1 min or 1 hr, and repeat for all switchback events in encounters 8–19; if most switchbacks occur while the correlation-matched M_A is below unity, the claim that these excursions are physically relevant switchback hosts is contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that there is no uniquely correct averaging interval for the Alfvén Mach number; the interval should be chosen to match the scale of the physics being studied. For local processes such as switchbacks and shear instabilities, the relevant scale is the magnetic correlation time, which the authors measure to be a few minutes near the Alfvén transition (scaling as R^0.82 with heliocentric distance and M_A^0.61 with Mach number). Applying this reasoning to PSP encounter 14, the paper identifies a super-Alfvénic excursion at 12-11 20:45 that coincides with a switchback. The excursion is visible with 1-minute, 5-minute, 30-minute, and 1-hour averaging, but a 5-hour or 1

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that local plasma behavior is set by fluctuations that persist only a few minutes, so averaging over five to ten hours hides the true state of a short-lived super-Alfvénic patch; if hours-long averages are the correct reference instead, the excursion is an artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Brief super-Alfvénic intervals that contain switchbacks can be genuine features of the near-Sun solar wind, so classifying them as sub-Alfvénic because of a long average misidentifies the local regime.
Switchbacks remain predominantly super-Alfvénic phenomena; varying the averaging window from 1 min to 10 hr does not change that global association.
Studies of local dynamics—switchback formation, shear instabilities, the fragmented Alfvén zone—should adopt backgrounds set by the correlation time rather than by multi-hour averages.
The magnetic fluctuation energy profile across the Alfvén transition is robust to averaging window, including the sub-Alfvénic departure from WKB expectations, which indicates fluctuation energy is generated in the region 0.5 < M_A < 1 rather than simply advected from the Sun.
Correlation time near the transition is only minutes, so near-Sun turbulence has largest coherent structures that decorrelate on timescales comparable to the data cadence of a few minutes.

Reading between the lines

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

An implication the authors leave implicit: if the correlation-scale criterion were applied retrospectively, some switchback events previously classified as sub-Alfvénic using multi-hour backgrounds might be reclassified as super-Alfvénic, potentially reconciling conflicting claims about where switchbacks form.
The same correlation-scale logic could be extended to other local parameters, such as plasma beta or sonic Mach number, where short-window versus long-window estimates may similarly reverse the classification of individual intervals.
A testable extension: for each encounter, compute M_A with a window equal to the local τ_c and compare the switchback occurrence rate inside M_A > 1 intervals to the rate expected from the fraction of time spent above unity; the paper's interpretation predicts an excess in the correlated, short-window case.
The scaling τ_c ~ R^0.82 M_A^0.61, if it holds in future encounters, could be used to define an adaptive averaging window for automated switchback surveys, making the background choice less arbitrary.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Goodwill et al. is a systematic sensitivity study of rolling-average length on PSP Alfven Mach number estimates. The clear result is that MA distributions are nearly invariant between 1 min and 10 hr windows (E8-19), while fluctuation energy increases with window length and correlation time drops with distance and MA. These are useful, reproducible diagnostics; the scripts and data are available. That part is solid and worth publishing.

The paper is also honest about what it does not show. The all-encounter confirmation that switchbacks are mostly super-Alfvenic is only referenced, not displayed, so readers cannot verify the statistical generality. The power-law exponents in Figure 4 come without uncertainty estimates. Neither issue is fatal.

The softest spot is the interpretation of the 12-11 20:45 excursion. The authors call it 'physically relevant' because the correlation time is 4-5 min, so 5-10 hr averages are too long. That is a reasonable heuristic, but it is only a postulate, as they acknowledge. The stress-test concern is legitimate: with 1-min averaging, the switchback's own enhanced radial velocity and rotated field are inside the window, so the computed super-Alfvenic state may be a property of the switchback structure, not its background. The correlation time of magnetic fluctuations does not settle which averaging window defines the 'correct' background. The paper's other example at 12-11 23:00 has no switchback, so that one is less affected, but the main conclusion leans on the unproven scale-matching assumption.

I would send this to peer review. A good referee can ask for the missing all-encounter diagnostics, uncertainty on the fits, and a more careful discussion of whether the excursion is an ambient feature or a switchback-induced artifact. The statistical core is worth sharing, and the over-interpretation can be fixed.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript uses Parker Solar Probe observations (encounters 8–19, with encounters 1–19 for the correlation-time analysis) to study how the choice of rolling-average window affects the derived Alfvén Mach number, switchback identification, magnetic fluctuation energy, and correlation time. The authors report that the probability distribution of MA is nearly unchanged for averaging windows from 1 min to 10 hr, that magnetic fluctuation energy increases systematically with window length while preserving a consistent profile across the Alfvén transition, and that the magnetic correlation time decreases with decreasing heliocentric distance and MA. They further argue that a brief super-Alfvénic excursion on 12-11 20:45 is physically real, based on the correlation time of ~4–5 min being much shorter than the 5–10 hr windows that erase the excursion.

Significance. If accepted, the paper provides a quantitative, encounter-spanning characterization of the sensitivity of MA and fluctuation-energy estimates to averaging, and it proposes an observationally motivated rule for choosing averaging windows tied to the correlation scale. The availability of data and analysis scripts is a strength, and the explicit formulas (Eqs. 1–4) make the computations reproducible. The correlation-time scaling results (Fig. 4) are a useful statistical contribution. However, the paper's sharpest interpretive claim—the physical relevance of the 12-11 20:45 super-Alfvénic excursion—rests on an untested postulate and a potential confound, which limits the strength of the conclusions.

major comments (2)

[§4 (Fig. 5)] The conclusion that the 12-11 20:45 super-Alfvénic excursion is "physically relevant" is based on the postulate that the correlation time (~4–5 min) is the appropriate background scale for local dynamics. This postulate is stated explicitly ("it seems appropriate to postulate..."), but the paper does not address the alternative that the super-Alfvénic state is a property of the switchback itself: the 1-min to 1-hr rolling averages are computed from data that include the switchback's large V_R and rotated B, so the excursion may not reflect the ambient flow. To support the claim, please show that the excursion persists when the switchback interval is excluded from the averaging, or provide an independent dynamical diagnostic.
[§3 (all-encounter statement)] The statement "This is confirmed in diagnostics for all encounters that we analyzed, by inspection of plots constructed in the same format as Figure 1. (These are not shown here.)" is an unsupported empirical claim that is central to the key point that switchbacks are predominantly super-Alfvénic. Since the plots are not shown, the statistical generality is unverifiable. Please include a summary diagnostic (e.g., per-encounter fraction of switchback time in the super-Alfvénic state, or a compact version of the all-encounter plot).

minor comments (5)

[Figure 2] The dashed vertical lines marking the means for different τ likely overlap because the means are nearly identical; please use distinct line styles, a legend, or an inset to identify which τ corresponds to each line.
[Figure 4] The power-law exponents (R^0.82 and M_A^0.61) are quoted without uncertainties or goodness-of-fit; please provide them.
[§2.2] The sentence "We therefore show Z_{10hr} for the longest value τ=10 hr" is confusing in context, since Figure 1c appears to show switchback intervals for multiple τ and Figure 1d shows Z_{10hr}; please clarify the relationship between the two panels.
[Abstract / §4] The phrase "judiciously-chosen averaging scales" is vague; specify the range (e.g., 1 min to 10 hr) and the physical criterion used to select it.
[Eq. (4)] The notation ⟨b(t)·b(t+t')⟩_{T-t'} is ambiguous; consider defining the average explicitly as an average over t from 0 to T-t'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's central MA statistics, correlation times and WKB comparison are computed directly from PSP data; the sharpest interpretive claim rests on an explicit postulate and unshown all-encounter confirmation, which is under-support rather than circularity.

full rationale

No load-bearing step in the derivation chain reduces to its own input. Equations (1)-(4) define the rolling-mean Alfven Mach number, switchback parameter, fluctuation energy, and autocorrelation, all applied directly to PSP data. The WKB comparison in Figure 3 is a parameter-free reference model, not a fit to the data's MA or delta-B values. The density calibration factor 0.86 is inherited from the self-cited Ruffolo et al. (2024) procedure and is disclosed as empirical, but it does not control the averaging-insensitivity of the sub-Alfvenic intervals or the correlation-time trends, which are the independent content of the paper. The conclusion that the 12-11 20:45 super-Alfvenic excursion is 'physically relevant' is justified by an explicitly stated postulate ('Associating this with the correlation scale, it seems appropriate to postulate that shear effects would be most evident at scales of a few minutes...'), not by an equation that equals its own input. The skeptic's concern that the short-window MA includes the switchback's own enhanced flow is a scientific argument about the correct definition of background, not a demonstration that the paper's conclusion is true by construction. The sentence 'These are not shown here' for the all-encounter confirmation is a missing-evidence problem, not circularity. Overall: heavily self-cited but not circular; the central averaging-insensitivity and correlation-time results would stand even if every self-citation were removed.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on data processing choices and a scale-matching heuristic rather than on new physical entities. The only fitted input is the inherited 0.86 density factor; the key interpretive assumption is that correlation time defines the meaningful background scale for local dynamics.

free parameters (1)

empirical density factor 0.86 = 0.86
When QTN density is unavailable, the proton density from SPAN-I is multiplied by 0.86, a factor derived in Ruffolo et al. (2024) from comparisons with quasi-thermal noise densities. This enters all Mach number calculations.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption QTN electron density can be substituted for proton density in the Alfven speed with proton mass.
Equation (1) uses N_e with m_p; this assumes quasi-neutrality and a single-fluid treatment. Standard in near-Sun solar wind analyses.
ad hoc to paper The correlation time is the appropriate physical scale for defining the background for local dynamical processes.
Postulated in Section 4: 'Associating this with the correlation scale, it seems appropriate to postulate that shear effects would be most evident at scales of a few minutes...' This is the load-bearing premise for the conclusion that short super-Alfvenic excursions are physically relevant.
domain assumption WKB theory provides the correct fluctuation-energy baseline against which observed departures are interpreted.
The dashed line in Figure 3 is the WKB prediction; the paper interprets departures as evidence of in-situ generation. The validity of WKB as the appropriate baseline is assumed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Averaging Effects on the Solar Wind Alfven Mach Number: Implications for Switchbacks and Alfven Transition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/A7KUWGVF

@misc{pith2026260728773,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Averaging Effects on the Solar Wind Alfven Mach Number: Implications for Switchbacks and Alfven Transition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/A7KUWGVF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.28773}
}

read the original abstract

Averaging techniques in solar wind measurements have been a longstanding subject of debate. Using Parker Solar Probe (PSP) observations from encounters 1 to 19, we investigate how averaging timescales influence the characterization of turbulent properties across the Alfvenic transition. We compute the rolling mean Alfven Mach number over various averaging intervals, which are then analyzed against switchbacks, magnetic fluctuation energy, and correlation time. We find that the distribution of subAlfvenic intervals is relatively insensitive to judiciously-chosen averaging scales. In contrast, magnetic fluctuation energies increase systematically with larger averaging window, while maintaining a consistent profile across the Alfven transition. We further show that the effective magnetic correlation time decreases with decreasing heliocentric distance and MA, reaching values of several minutes approaching MA =1. These results demonstrate the importance of choosing physically meaningful backgrounds for turbulence parameters, such as the correlation scales, and their impacts on characterizing the solar wind.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28773 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** PSP E14 time series of (a) magnetic field components (BR, BT , BN ) and magnitude (|B|), (b) radial velocity (VR) and electron density (Ne), (c) time in switchback state (Z > 0.5), (d) switchback parameter relative to 10 hr average (Z10hr), and (e) Mach number (MA). Panels (b) and (e) display averages varying from 1 min to 10 hr. –6– [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** PDF of ⟨VR⟩τ , ⟨VA⟩τ , and ⟨MA⟩τ varying centered moving window mean of size τ for E8 − E19. Dashed vertical lines indicate mean values. The solid vertical line indicates the Alfv´enic transition. Width of rolling window average does not considerably change PDF or mean. –7– [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Binned median magnetic fluctuation energy density δB2 τ1 /µ0 vs ⟨MA⟩τ2 for various averaging timescales (τ1, τ2). All averaging windows where τ1 = τ2 are shown in the colorbar. All other averages are shown in the legend. The dashed line represents the trend expected from WKB theory for the case of non-interacting Alfv´enic fluctuations generated at the Sun [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Correlation times as a function of heliocentric distance (left) and Mach number (right). The red and black squares are the mean and median values calculated over the binned intervals. Dashed lines are the best fits of the scatter. –9– [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fi…

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Zoom of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

13 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

[1]

H., Ruffolo, D., Thepthong, P.,

Adhikari, S., Bandyopadhyay, R., Goodwill, J., Matthaeus, W. H., Ruffolo, D., Thepthong, P., . . . Goldstein, M. L. (2026, January). Characterization of the Alfv´ en Transition in the Young Solar Wind using Parker Solar Probe Observa- tions Approaching Solar Maximum.The Astrophysical Journal,997(2),

2026
[8]

M., Braga, C

doi: 10.1007/s11214-023-00952-4 Romeo, O. M., Braga, C. R., Badman, S. T., Larson, D. E., Stevens, M. L., Huang, J., . . . Linton, M. G. (2023, September). Near-Sun In Situ and Remote-sensing Observations of a Coronal Mass Ejection and its Effect on the Heliospheric Current Sheet.The Astrophysical Journal,954(2),

doi:10.1007/s11214-023-00952-4 2023
[14]

D., Goetz, K., Harvey, P

doi: 10.1007/s11214-026-01267-w Bale, S. D., Goetz, K., Harvey, P. R., Turin, P., Bonnell, J. W., Dudok de Wit, T., . . . Wygant, J. R. (2016, December). The FIELDS Instrument Suite for Solar Probe Plus.Space Science Reviews,204(1), 49–82. doi: 10.1007/ s11214-016-0244-5 Bandyopadhyay, R., Matthaeus, W. H., McComas, D. J., Chhiber, R., Usmanov, –12– manus...

doi:10.1007/s11214-026-01267-w 2016
[23]

V., Bale, S

doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac45fa Dudok de Wit, T., Krasnoselskikh, V. V., Bale, S. D., Bonnell, J. W., Bowen, T. A., Chen, C. H. K., . . . Whittlesey, P. L. (2020, February). Switchbacks in the Near-Sun Magnetic Field: Long Memory and Impact on the Turbu- lence Cascade.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series,246,

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac45fa 2020
[39]

J., Velli, M

doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5853 Fox, N. J., Velli, M. C., Bale, S. D., Decker, R., Driesman, A., Howard, R. A., . . . Szabo, A. (2016, December). The Solar Probe Plus Mission: Human- ity’s First Visit to Our Star.Space Science Reviews,204(1), 7–48. doi: 10.1007/s11214-015-0211-6 Germano, M. (1992, May). Turbulence: The filtering approach.Journal of Fluid Me...

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5853 2016
[44]

N., Goldstein, M

Retrieved fromhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84 Parashar, T. N., Goldstein, M. L., Maruca, B. A., Matthaeus, W. H., Ruffolo, D., Bandyopadhyay, R., . . . Raouafi, N. (2020, February). Measures of Scale- dependent Alfv´ enicity in the First PSP Solar Encounter.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series,246(2),

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84doi: 2020
[58]

Paulson, K

doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab64e6 Payne, D., Akhavan-Tafti, M., Goodwill, J., Badman, S., Bandyopadhyay, R., Zank, G., . . . Paulson, K. (2026, April). Evolution of Magnetic Deflections at a Conver- sion Layer near the Alfv´ en Surface.The Astrophysical Journal Letters,1001(2), L29. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae4fbd Pecora, F., Matthaeus, W. H., Primavera, L., Gr...

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab64e6 2026
[75]

P., Adhikari, L., Telloni, D., Stevens, M., Kasper, J

doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad34ab Zhao, L.-L., Zank, G. P., Adhikari, L., Telloni, D., Stevens, M., Kasper, J. C., . . . Raouafi, N. E. (2022, August). Turbulence and Waves in the Sub-Alfv´ enic Solar Wind Observed by the Parker Solar Probe during Encounter 10.The Astrophysi- cal Journal Letters,934(2), L36. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac8353 Zhao, L.-L., Zank, G....

doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad34ab 2022

Show all 13 references

[94]

Matthaeus, W

doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb594 Ruffolo, D., Thepthong, P., Pongkitiwanichakul, P., Roy, S., Pecora, F., Bandy- opadhyay, R., . . . Matthaeus, W. H. (2024, December). Observed Fluctuation Enhancement and Departure from WKB Theory in Sub-Alfv´ enic Solar Wind.The Astrophysical Jo...

2024 doi
[126]

E., Chhiber, R., Roy, S., Goodwill, J., Pecora, F., Jarosik, J.,

doi: 10.1007/s11207-023-02218-2 Cuesta, M. E., Chhiber, R., Roy, S., Goodwill, J., Pecora, F., Jarosik, J., . . . Bandyopadhyay, R. (2022, June). Isotropization and Evolution of Energy- containing Eddies in Solar Wind Turbulence: Parker Solar Probe, Helios 1, ACE, WIND, and Vo...

2022 doi
[138]

S., Neugebauer, M., & Goldstein, B

doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac93f5 Matteini, L., Horbury, T. S., Neugebauer, M., & Goldstein, B. E. (2014). De- pendence of solar wind speed on the local magnetic field orientation: Role of Alfv´ enic fluctuations.Geophysical Research Letters,41(2), 259–265. doi: 10.1002/2013GL0584...

2014 doi
[168]

E., & Matthaeus, W

doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ace62e Roy, S., Chhiber, R., Dasso, S., Ruiz, M. E., & Matthaeus, W. H. (2022, April). Von Karman correlation similarity in solar wind magnetohydrodynamic turbulence. Physical Review E,105(4), 045204. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.105.045204 Ruffolo, D., Matthae...

2022 doi
[259]

T., Fargette, N., Matteini, L., Agapitov, O

doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2c78 Badman, S. T., Fargette, N., Matteini, L., Agapitov, O. V., Akhavan-Tafti, M., Bale, S. D., . . . Verniero, J. (2026, January). Properties of Magnetic Switch- backs in the Near-Sun Solar Wind.Space Science Reviews,222(1),

2026 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

H., Ruffolo, D., Thepthong, P.,

Adhikari, S., Bandyopadhyay, R., Goodwill, J., Matthaeus, W. H., Ruffolo, D., Thepthong, P., . . . Goldstein, M. L. (2026, January). Characterization of the Alfv´ en Transition in the Young Solar Wind using Parker Solar Probe Observa- tions Approaching Solar Maximum.The Astrophysical Journal,997(2),

2026

[2] [8]

M., Braga, C

doi: 10.1007/s11214-023-00952-4 Romeo, O. M., Braga, C. R., Badman, S. T., Larson, D. E., Stevens, M. L., Huang, J., . . . Linton, M. G. (2023, September). Near-Sun In Situ and Remote-sensing Observations of a Coronal Mass Ejection and its Effect on the Heliospheric Current Sheet.The Astrophysical Journal,954(2),

doi:10.1007/s11214-023-00952-4 2023

[3] [14]

D., Goetz, K., Harvey, P

doi: 10.1007/s11214-026-01267-w Bale, S. D., Goetz, K., Harvey, P. R., Turin, P., Bonnell, J. W., Dudok de Wit, T., . . . Wygant, J. R. (2016, December). The FIELDS Instrument Suite for Solar Probe Plus.Space Science Reviews,204(1), 49–82. doi: 10.1007/ s11214-016-0244-5 Bandyopadhyay, R., Matthaeus, W. H., McComas, D. J., Chhiber, R., Usmanov, –12– manus...

doi:10.1007/s11214-026-01267-w 2016

[4] [23]

V., Bale, S

doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac45fa Dudok de Wit, T., Krasnoselskikh, V. V., Bale, S. D., Bonnell, J. W., Bowen, T. A., Chen, C. H. K., . . . Whittlesey, P. L. (2020, February). Switchbacks in the Near-Sun Magnetic Field: Long Memory and Impact on the Turbu- lence Cascade.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series,246,

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ac45fa 2020

[5] [39]

J., Velli, M

doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5853 Fox, N. J., Velli, M. C., Bale, S. D., Decker, R., Driesman, A., Howard, R. A., . . . Szabo, A. (2016, December). The Solar Probe Plus Mission: Human- ity’s First Visit to Our Star.Space Science Reviews,204(1), 7–48. doi: 10.1007/s11214-015-0211-6 Germano, M. (1992, May). Turbulence: The filtering approach.Journal of Fluid Me...

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5853 2016

[6] [44]

N., Goldstein, M

Retrieved fromhttp://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84 Parashar, T. N., Goldstein, M. L., Maruca, B. A., Matthaeus, W. H., Ruffolo, D., Bandyopadhyay, R., . . . Raouafi, N. (2020, February). Measures of Scale- dependent Alfv´ enicity in the First PSP Solar Encounter.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series,246(2),

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84doi: 2020

[7] [58]

Paulson, K

doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab64e6 Payne, D., Akhavan-Tafti, M., Goodwill, J., Badman, S., Bandyopadhyay, R., Zank, G., . . . Paulson, K. (2026, April). Evolution of Magnetic Deflections at a Conver- sion Layer near the Alfv´ en Surface.The Astrophysical Journal Letters,1001(2), L29. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae4fbd Pecora, F., Matthaeus, W. H., Primavera, L., Gr...

work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab64e6 2026

[8] [75]

P., Adhikari, L., Telloni, D., Stevens, M., Kasper, J

doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad34ab Zhao, L.-L., Zank, G. P., Adhikari, L., Telloni, D., Stevens, M., Kasper, J. C., . . . Raouafi, N. E. (2022, August). Turbulence and Waves in the Sub-Alfv´ enic Solar Wind Observed by the Parker Solar Probe during Encounter 10.The Astrophysi- cal Journal Letters,934(2), L36. doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac8353 Zhao, L.-L., Zank, G....

doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad34ab 2022