Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 26 references

Initial Analysis of Ionospheric Electron Density Variations Across Ecuador Using GPS Data

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper maps total electron content over Ecuador and reports daytime peaks at or above 80 TECU, with nighttime floors above zero.

desk verdict The paper's central TEC values rest on an equation that is missing a factor, but the underlying data and regional focus make it a candidate for revision rather than outright rejection. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05337 v1 pith:LLJUSKUO submitted 2025-02-07 physics.space-ph

E. D. López , B. A. Ubillús , G. L. Guamán This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.space-ph
keywords TotalElectronContentTECGPSionosphereEcuadorequatorialgeomagneticstormmapping
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 tries to establish a first regional picture of the ionosphere over Ecuador by turning dual-frequency GPS travel-time differences at 13 receivers into maps of total electron content (TEC) for January 2022. TEC is the number of electrons in a column through the ionosphere, measured in TECU ($1\,\mathrm{TECU}=10^{16}$ electrons per square meter), and it controls how much GPS signals are delayed. The paper claims that TEC over this equatorial country oscillates on a daily solar-driven cycle, with daytime peaks at or above 80 TECU, nighttime values that never fall to zero, and synchronized timing across all stations. It also reports persistent spatial features—elevated electron content near Azuay and Orellana, lower content along the coast—and a TEC decrease associated with the G1 geomagnetic storm of 8–9 January 2022. If these patterns hold, the maps give equatorial ionospheric modelers and GPS users a regional baseline for delay corrections and a starting point for monitoring space weather over Ecuador.

What carries the argument

The central object is vertical total electron content (VTEC), obtained from the pseudorange difference between the two GPS carrier frequencies. The working identity is $\mathrm{TEC}_p = \frac{1}{40.3}\left(\frac{f_1 f_2}{f_1-f_2}\right)(P_2-P_1)$, which converts the measured travel-time difference into slant electron content; a thin-shell mapping function $\mathrm{MF}=1/\cos(z')$ then projects slant values to vertical at an assumed 350 km ionospheric height, and a 30-degree elevation cutoff plus differential-code-bias corrections clean the input. Spline interpolation over the 13 stations turns the point values into continuous color maps, and the maps' hour-by-hour time series carry the paper's claims about diurnal, weekly, and monthly oscillations.

What would settle it

Recompute one January 2022 day with carrier-phase-leveled TEC for the same 13 stations and compare hour by hour: if the pseudorange-only peaks are off by more than a few TECU, or if the Azuay and Orellana highs vanish, the map features are not robust. Then inspect a geomagnetically quiet night after bias calibration: if any station's vertical TEC reaches zero or below, the never-zero claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the authors' own terms, the discovery is that pseudorange-derived TEC mapped from 13 GPS receivers by spline interpolation yields a workable first picture of how the equatorial ionosphere over Ecuador changes in space and time. The data show an oscillatory diurnal pattern—a minimum in the early hours, a plateau between about 10:00 and 16:00 local time, and a decline into evening—with peak values sometimes reaching or exceeding 80 TECU at all stations, and with night minima that never touch zero because the F2 layer retains electrons until dawn. The maps show repeatable spatial features: higher TEC near Azuay and in Orellana, lower TEC along the coast, and a band of lower concentration in the north and south. The study also reports that the G1 geomagnetic storm of 8–9 January 2022 coincided with a drop in TEC at the Ecuadorian stations, and it takes the synchronized timing across stations and the rough agreement with independent global TEC maps as validation of the method.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that pseudorange-derived TEC, cleaned with a 30-degree elevation cutoff and differential-code-bias corrections, is accurate enough to describe ionospheric structure when only 13 stations are interpolated into maps, and the paper gives no uncertainty bounds for the TEC values.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Nighttime TEC over Ecuador stays above zero because the F2 region retains electron density until sunrise, so models that assume full ionospheric depletion at night would understate residual GPS delay.
  • The observed peaks near or above 80 TECU set a quiet-month baseline for equatorial TEC, meaning positioning and communication systems in the region must budget for delays at least that large.
  • The synchronized TEC variations across the 13 stations imply that a single regional time series can represent the broad temporal pattern, even where spatial fine structure differs.
  • The G1 storm on 8–9 January 2022 coincided with a measurable TEC decrease at Ecuadorian stations, indicating that even minor geomagnetic disturbances leave a detectable signature in equatorial TEC.
  • The local maxima near Azuay and Orellana and the lower coastal values identify candidate regions for focused follow-up study of the day-side ionosphere.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An inference from the paper's closing limitations—day/night modulation and atmospheric thermal expansion were not included—is that absolute TEC levels such as the 80 TECU peaks are less constrained than the qualitative diurnal shape; the planned larger network should test whether the peaks shift when those terms are added.
  • Because the TEC values come from pseudorange data with no stated uncertainties, a sharp check of the spatial features is to recompute one day with carrier-phase-leveled TEC and see whether the Azuay and Orellana highs survive.
  • If spline interpolation from only 13 stations over-smooths the field, the maps could be hiding the two crests of the Equatorial Ionization Anomaly; adding the roughly 50 additional stations the paper says are planned would reveal whether those crests appear inside Ecuador.
  • A testable extension of the never-zero claim is to run the same analysis across several years, including solar minimum, to see whether nightly TEC minima stay above a positive floor or whether the January 2022 result was specific to that month.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports a preliminary regional mapping of vertical total electron content (VTEC) over Ecuador for January 2022 using pseudorange GPS observations from 13 REGME receivers. The authors derive a dual-frequency TEC formula from the Appleton-Hartree refractive index, apply a 30-degree elevation cutoff and IGS differential code biases, convert slant to vertical TEC with a single-layer mapping function, and interpolate the results with ArcGIS splines to produce maps at four epochs. They report diurnal, weekly, and monthly TEC oscillations with daytime peaks of 70-80 TECU, nighttime minima that do not reach zero, and they attribute a TEC decrease on 8-9 January 2022 to a G1 geomagnetic storm.

Significance. If the quantitative results survive correction, the paper would provide a useful preliminary regional TEC dataset for an equatorial area with sparse published mapping and would demonstrate a reproducible workflow based on public RINEX data, standard mapping functions, and IGS DCB products. The use of public REGME data and the explicit description of the processing chain are strengths. However, the algebraic error in Eq. (7), the absence of uncertainty or validation for the interpolated maps, and the unsupported storm attribution currently prevent the reported peak values and the causality claims from being accepted as established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.2, Eq. (7)] Equation (7) does not follow algebraically from Eq. (6). Substituting d_ion = 40.3 TEC/f^2 into P1-P2 = d_ion1 - d_ion2 gives TEC = (P2-P1)/40.3 * [f1^2 f2^2/((f1-f2)(f1+f2))] = (P2-P1)/40.3 * [f1 f2/(f1-f2)] * [f1 f2/(f1+f2)]. Equation (7) omits the factor f1 f2/(f1+f2), which is approximately 6.9e8 Hz (or roughly 690 MHz) with the frequencies used in the paper. Since the text states that Eq. (7) is the expression used to compute TEC, the absolute values reported in Figure 1 and in the abstract, including peaks of 70-80 TECU and minima that never reach zero, are not traceable to the method as written. The authors must either correct Eq. (7) and confirm that the software used the correct coefficient, or, if the software used Eq. (7) as printed, recompute all TEC values.
  2. [Section 3, Figure 1] The TEC maps are produced by spline interpolation from only 13 stations in ArcGIS, but no uncertainty estimates, station-coverage analysis, or quantitative validation against independent TEC maps are presented. The regional features highlighted in Section 3, such as the high values in Azuay and Orellana and the lower coastal values, may be interpolation artifacts given the sparse station distribution. I recommend adding station locations to the map, a leave-one-out or residual analysis, and quantitative comparison with IGS/IONEX or NOAA TEC values at the station locations before claiming that the maps provide an 'accurate depiction' of the spatial distribution.
  3. [Section 3, Figure 2 and following text] The claim that the TEC decrease on January 8-9, 2022 is 'strongly correlate[d]' with a G1 storm and 'directly linked' to it is not supported by the data shown. No geomagnetic indices (e.g., Kp, Dst, or SYM-H), no solar wind parameters, no control quiet days, and no statistical significance test are provided. In addition, the Data Processing subsection describes January 2022 as 'free from storms or disturbances,' which contradicts the later G1-storm narrative. The causal attribution should be removed or replaced with a quantitative comparison of the disturbed period against a quiet-day baseline and appropriate geomagnetic indices.
  4. [Sections 2.3 and 3, Figures 1-2] The quantitative claims in the abstract and conclusions rest on unsmoothed pseudorange TEC, which is substantially noisier than carrier-phase or carrier-phase-smoothed TEC, yet no uncertainty estimates, error bars, or comparisons with phase-derived TEC are provided. Without quantifying the noise level, for example by reporting RMS scatter per satellite arc or by comparing with L1-L2 phase TEC, the specific magnitudes of the peak and minimum TEC values are not established. This is needed before the 80 TECU peaks and the non-zero minima can be accepted as robust.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2.3.2] The text states that the data underwent 'rigorous validation' through cross-comparison with IGS or regional GNSS networks, but later says that comparison with NOAA and GPS agencies is planned for an upcoming project. Please clarify what validation was actually performed and show the comparison or remove the claim.
  2. [Section 2.2, after Eq. (7)] The sentence 'The term involving the frequencies f1 and f2 is minimal in determining the TEC' appears to be a typographical error; the frequency coefficient is a large multiplier and should be corrected.
  3. [Section 2.3.2] Please specify how the IGS DCBs were applied in the processing chain, since Eq. (7) contains no explicit bias terms; this information is necessary for reproducibility.
  4. [Section 3] The spatial coverage statement '-5 degrees to 2 degrees N latitude and from -82 degrees to -74 degrees E longitude' should use W for western longitudes; as written it is inconsistent with the negative longitude values.
  5. [Figure 2 and text] The caption labels the panels as daily (a), weekly (b), and monthly (c), but the text refers to 'Figure 2-a' for both the diurnal and weekly evolution. Please renumber the panel references.
  6. [Section 2.3.1 and Figure 1] A table listing the 13 station names, coordinates, and receiver types would improve reproducibility; currently the station distribution is only shown in Figure 1.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: TEC values come from standard GPS equations and external NOAA/IGS comparisons; Eq. (7) is an algebra error, not a circular step.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain from pseudorange equations (4)-(5) through Eq. (6) to the TEC estimate (7) and the STEC-to-VTEC mapping function, every quantity is computed from external GPS observables with standard formulas; no parameter is fitted to the reported TEC values and then renamed as a prediction. The validation against NOAA and IGS TEC products is an external benchmark comparison, not a re-fit or a self-calibration. The self-citations (Lopez et al., 2022; Ubillus, 2024; Toapanta Guamanarca, 2021) appear only in background statements (TEC definition, electrojet, Appleton-Hartree context) and carry no load-bearing premise; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from those works. The conclusion's caveats about daytime/nighttime modulation and thermal expansion are admitted limitations, not circular reductions. One non-circular defect should be flagged: Eq. (7) does not follow algebraically from Eq. (6) — the factor f1f2/(f1+f2) is missing — so the absolute TEC magnitudes are not traceable to the derivation as written. This is a correctness/omitted-factor issue, not a self-referential equivalence, and it does not raise the circularity score.

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

The paper's TEC calculation rests on standard ionospheric physics (Appleton-Hartree simplified equation) and common mapping assumptions (thin shell, elevation cutoff). The authors introduce no free parameters or new entities. The weaker assumptions are the reliability of pseudorange-only TEC and the causal interpretation of the geomagnetic storm effect.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Appleton-Hartree refractive index formula, with neglect of collisions and Earth's magnetic field, is valid for TEC calculation (Eq. 2).
    The derivation of phase and group refractive indices from Eq. (1) assumes Z about 0 and a small magnetic field angle, which is standard in GPS TEC processing but not exact.
  • domain assumption The ionosphere is a thin shell at 350-450 km altitude for the STEC-to-VTEC mapping (Section 2.3.1).
    The mapping function MF=1/cos(z') assumes all electrons are concentrated in a shell; in reality they are distributed, causing a systematic error depending on azimuth.
  • domain assumption A 30-degree elevation cutoff removes all multipath and mapping-function errors (Section 2.3.1).
    The paper assumes this cutoff ensures accuracy, but no analysis shows residual errors.
  • domain assumption Pseudorange TEC noise and residual differential code biases are negligible after IGS calibration and filtering (Sections 2.2, 2.3.2).
    The paper neglects the epsilon term in Eq. (6) and applies moving averages, but no error bars or comparisons with carrier-phase TEC are provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Initial Analysis of Ionospheric Electron Density Variations Across Ecuador Using GPS Data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LLJUSKUO

@misc{pith2026250205337,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Initial Analysis of Ionospheric Electron Density Variations Across Ecuador Using GPS Data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LLJUSKUO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05337}
}
read the original abstract

In this study, we performed a preliminary mapping of Total Electron Content (TEC) over Ecuador using Global Positioning System (GPS) data. This process entails collecting and analyzing pseudorange observations from multiple GPS receivers nationwide. These receivers record signals from GPS satellites, and by comparing the arrival times of these signals, the number of electrons in the ionosphere can be inferred along the lines of sight between the satellites and the receivers. To perform this process, signal processing algorithms are utilized to calculate TEC values, which are subsequently used to generate two-dimensional color maps that illustrate the spatial distribution of TEC in Ecuador. These maps, created using data from 13 GPS receivers distributed throughout the country, offer a valuable visualization of TEC variability regarding geographic location and time. Focusing on specific days in January 2022, this study aims to analyze patterns and trends in ionospheric electron content across the region. The results revealed an oscillatory pattern in TEC evolution, with intensity peaks sometimes reaching or exceeding 80 TEC units (TECU), while local minima never reach zero values. This preliminary TEC mapping approach over Ecuador using GPS data is crucial for understanding ionospheric dynamics in the region. It may have various applications, including improving the accuracy of GPS navigation, monitoring solar activity, and forecasting ionospheric phenomena that can impact communications and satellite navigation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05337 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Maps displaying the TEC distribution over Ecuador at different hours on four dis￾tinct days in January 2022. mosphere during the day and leads to a decrease in ionization at night. In the morning, solar radiation increases atmospheric ionization, resulting in a delayed rise in TEC. Con￾versely, in the evening, the reduction in solar radiation leads to decreased atmospheric ionization and a subsequent decrease in ele… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. TEC Variation: daily (a), weekly (b), and monthly (c). This unanticipated geomagnetic storm had a measurable impact on the Earth’s iono￾sphere. As shown in Figures 2, a decrease in TEC intensity was observed across the study’s measurement stations. The timing and pattern of this decrease strongly correlate with the onset of the geomagnetic disturbance, suggesting that the reduction in TEC is di￾rectly linked to the … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

26 extracted references · 24 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]

    , Lepping, R P

    Baker2020 APACrefauthors Baker, D N. , Lepping, R P. \ White, W L. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Solar activity and its impact on the Earth's magnetosphere Solar activity and its impact on the Earth's magnetosphere . Journal of Space Weather 18 4 215--228 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1002/jspace.2020.18.4.215 APACrefDOI

    work page doi:10.1002/jspace.2020.18.4.215 2020

  4. [4]

    , Gaussiran II, T L

    Garner APACrefauthors Garner, T W. , Gaussiran II, T L. , Tolman, B W. , Harris, R B. , Calfas, R S. \ Gallagher, H. APACrefauthors \ 2008 . Total electron content measurements in ionospheric physics Total electron content measurements in ionospheric physics . Advances in Space Research 42 4 720--726 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1016/j.asr.2008.02.025 APACrefDOI

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2008.02.025 2008

  5. [5]

    , Soffel, H

    Glassmeier APACrefauthors Glassmeier, K H. , Soffel, H. \ Negendank, J. APACrefauthors \ 2008 . Geomagnetic field variations Geomagnetic field variations . Springer Science & Business Media

    work page 2008

  6. [6]

    APACrefauthors \ 2006

    Helliwell APACrefauthors Helliwell, R. APACrefauthors \ 2006 . Whistlers and Related Ionospheric Phenomena Whistlers and Related Ionospheric Phenomena . Mineola NY: Dover

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    APACrefauthors \ 2014

    Hernandez2014 APACrefauthors Hernandez, E. APACrefauthors \ 2014 . Ionospheric Variations and the Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) Ionospheric Variations and the Equatorial Ionization Anomaly (EIA) . Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 119 6 5164-5175 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1002/2014JA020358 APACrefDOI

    work page doi:10.1002/2014ja020358 2014

  8. [8]

    , Lichtenegger, H

    Hofmann APACrefauthors Hofmann-Wellenhof, B. , Lichtenegger, H. \ Wasle, E. APACrefauthors \ 2007 . GNSS-global navigation satellite systems: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo , and more Gnss-global navigation satellite systems: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo , and more . Springer Science & Business Media

    work page 2007

Show all 26 references
  1. [9]

    \ Hargreaves, J K

    Hargreaves APACrefauthors Hunsucker, R D. \ Hargreaves, J K. APACrefauthors \ 2009 . The High-Latitude Ionosphere and its Effects on Radio Propagation The High-Latitude Ionosphere and its Effects on Radio Propagation . Cambridge University Press

    2009

  2. [10]

    , Mayer, C

    Jakowsi APACrefauthors Jakowski, N. , Mayer, C. , Hoque, M M. \ Wilken, V. APACrefauthors \ 2011 . Total electron content models and their use in ionosphere monitoring Total electron content models and their use in ionosphere monitoring . Radio Science 46 06 1--11 . APACrefDOI...

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    APACrefauthors \ 1997

    Komjathy APACrefauthors Komjathy, A. APACrefauthors \ 1997 . Global ionospheric total electron content mapping using the Global Positioning System Global ionospheric total electron content mapping using the Global Positioning System . Geodesy and geomagnetic engineering 71 2 108--117

    1997

  4. [12]

    , Zhang, J

    Liu2021 APACrefauthors Liu, X. , Zhang, J. \ Wang, L. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Solar flares and geomagnetic storms: A review of the mechanisms and impacts Solar flares and geomagnetic storms: A review of the mechanisms and impacts . Space Weather Journal 23 5 121--138 . APACref...

    2021 doi

  5. [13]

    , Toapanta, E

    Ericson APACrefauthors Lopez, E D. , Toapanta, E. \ Barbier, H. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Ionospheric total electron content (TEC) above Ecuador Ionospheric total electron content (TEC) above Ecuador . Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2238 012010 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1088/17...

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    , Wilson, B D

    Mannucci APACrefauthors Mannucci, A J. , Wilson, B D. , Yuan, D N. , Ho, C H. , Lindqwister, U J. \ Runge, T F. APACrefauthors \ 1998 . A global mapping technique for GPS-derived ionospheric total electron content measurements A global mapping technique for GPS-derived ionosph...

    1998 doi

  7. [15]

    APACrefauthors \ 2014

    Markovic APACrefauthors Markovi \'c , M. APACrefauthors \ 2014 . Determination of total electron content in the ionosphere using GPS technology Determination of total electron content in the ionosphere using GPS technology . Geonauka 2 4 1--9 . APACrefDOI doi:10.14438/gn.2014....

    2014 doi

  8. [16]

    , Saito, S

    Nishioka APACrefauthors Nishioka, M. , Saito, S. , Tao, C. , Shiota, D. , Tsugawa, T. \ Ishii, M. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Statistical analysis of ionospheric total electron content (TEC): long-term estimation of extreme TEC in Japan Statistical analysis of ionospheric total el...

    2021 doi

  9. [17]

    , Ogawa, T

    Otsuka APACrefauthors Otsuka, Y. , Ogawa, T. , Saito, A. , Tsugawa, T. , Fukao, S. \ Miyazaki, S. APACrefauthors \ 2002 . A new technique for mapping of total electron content using GPS network in Japan A new technique for mapping of total electron content using GPS network in...

    2002 doi

  10. [18]

    , Kim, Y

    Park2019 APACrefauthors Park, J. , Kim, Y. \ Choi, S. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Ionospheric response to solar wind disturbances: A study of TEC behavior during G1 storms Ionospheric response to solar wind disturbances: A study of TEC behavior during G1 storms . Space Science Rev...

    2019 doi

  11. [19]

    \ Coster, A

    Rideout APACrefauthors Rideout, W. \ Coster, A. APACrefauthors \ 2006 . Automated GPS processing for global total electron content data Automated GPS processing for global total electron content data . GPS solutions 10 219--228 . APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/s10291-006-0029-5 APACrefDOI

    2006 doi

  12. [20]

    , Gurtner, W

    Schaer APACrefauthors Schaer, S. , Gurtner, W. \ Feltens, J. APACrefauthors \ 1998 . IONEX: The IONosphere map Exchange Format Version 1 IONEX: The IONosphere map Exchange Format Version 1 . Proceedings of the IGS AC workshop, Darmstadt, Germany 9 11 233-247

    1998

  13. [21]

    \ Smith, W H F

    Scharroo APACrefauthors Scharroo, R. \ Smith, W H F. APACrefauthors \ 2010 . A global positioning system-based climatology for the total electron content in the ionosphere A global positioning system-based climatology for the total electron content in the ionosphere . Journal ...

    2010 doi

  14. [22]

    , Harrison, F G

    Smith2022 APACrefauthors Smith, A B. , Harrison, F G. \ Lee, C P. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Geomagnetic disturbances and aurora observations in the UK: January 2022 event Geomagnetic disturbances and aurora observations in the UK: January 2022 event . Geophysical Research Letter...

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    APACrefauthors \ 2021

    Toapanta APACrefauthors Toapanta Guamanarca, E G. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Estimación del campo geomagnético ecuatorial a través del estudio del contenido total de electrones de la ionósfera Estimación del campo geomagnético ecuatorial a través del estudio del contenido total d...

    2021

  16. [24]

    APACrefauthors \ 2024

    Ubillus APACrefauthors Ubillus, B A. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Correcciones de retardos ionosféricos en radio señales de objetos celestes: generación de un mapa del contenido total de electrones (TEC) de la ionosfera sobre Ecuador Correcciones de retardos ionosféricos en radio s...

    2024

  17. [25]

    APACrefauthors \ 1994

    Webster APACrefauthors Webster, I R. APACrefauthors \ 1994 . A regional model for the prediction of ionospheric delay for single frequency users of the Global Positioning System A regional model for the prediction of ionospheric delay for single frequency users of the Global P...

    1994

  18. [26]

    , Abdullah, M

    Ismail APACrefauthors Ya’acob, N. , Abdullah, M. \ Ismail, M. APACrefauthors \ 2008 . Determination of GPS total electron content using single layer model (SLM) ionospheric mapping function Determination of GPS total electron content using single layer model (SLM) ionospheric ...

    2008

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.