Can the polarization tagging of the ionogram trace deceive autoscaling methods? The Learmonth case
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper focuses on the problem of invalid O/X polarization tagging of an ionogram and
how this can affect ionogram autoscaling methods. To illustrate this problem, 623 ionograms recorded in March and April 2004 (days 080-105) by the digisonde 256 installed at Learmonth (22.3° S, 114.1° E) were considered. These ionograms, often characterized by very unreliable O/X
polarization tagging of the echoes because of unresolved antenna issues, have been autoscaled by both ARTIST 4.2 and Autoscala. Results of comparisons between automatically and manually scaled foF2 data are shown for both programs, considering as acceptable an autoscaled value that lies within 0.5 MHz of the manual value. Autoscala values of foF2 agree with the manually-scaled values for ~99% of ionograms, while ARTIST values of foF2 agree with the manually-scaled values for ~75% of ionograms. While ARTIST was coded on the assumption of valid polarization
tagging, the fact remains that it produces invalid results when equipment issues cause invalid tagging. Autoscaling procedures that do not use the polarization tagging will generally work better than ARTIST in such cases. However, these other procedures are susceptible to failure in other situations.
how this can affect ionogram autoscaling methods. To illustrate this problem, 623 ionograms recorded in March and April 2004 (days 080-105) by the digisonde 256 installed at Learmonth (22.3° S, 114.1° E) were considered. These ionograms, often characterized by very unreliable O/X
polarization tagging of the echoes because of unresolved antenna issues, have been autoscaled by both ARTIST 4.2 and Autoscala. Results of comparisons between automatically and manually scaled foF2 data are shown for both programs, considering as acceptable an autoscaled value that lies within 0.5 MHz of the manual value. Autoscala values of foF2 agree with the manually-scaled values for ~99% of ionograms, while ARTIST values of foF2 agree with the manually-scaled values for ~75% of ionograms. While ARTIST was coded on the assumption of valid polarization
tagging, the fact remains that it produces invalid results when equipment issues cause invalid tagging. Autoscaling procedures that do not use the polarization tagging will generally work better than ARTIST in such cases. However, these other procedures are susceptible to failure in other situations.
Article Details
How to Cite
Pezzopane, M. and Scotto, C. (2008) “Can the polarization tagging of the ionogram trace deceive autoscaling methods? The Learmonth case”, Annals of Geophysics, 51(4), pp. 597–607. doi: 10.4401/ag-4457.
Issue
Section
OLD
Open-Access License
No Permission Required
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia applies the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) to all works we publish.
Under the CCAL, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their article, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, so long as the original authors and source are cited. No permission is required from the authors or the publishers.
In most cases, appropriate attribution can be provided by simply citing the original article.
If the item you plan to reuse is not part of a published article (e.g., a featured issue image), then please indicate the originator of the work, and the volume, issue, and date of the journal in which the item appeared. For any reuse or redistribution of a work, you must also make clear the license terms under which the work was published.
This broad license was developed to facilitate open access to, and free use of, original works of all types. Applying this standard license to your own work will ensure your right to make your work freely and openly available. For queries about the license, please contact ann.geophys@ingv.it.