Paper detail

Active region chromospheric magnetic fields

Context. A proper estimate of the chromospheric magnetic fields is believed to improve modelling of both active region and coronal mass ejection evolution. Aims. We investigate the similarity between the chromospheric magnetic field inferred from observations and the field obtained from a magnetohydrostatic (MHS) extrapolation. Methods. Based Fe i 6173 Å and Ca ii 8542 Å observations of NOAA active region 12723, we employed the spatially-regularised weak-field approximation (WFA) to derive the vector magnetic field in the chromosphere from Ca ii, as well as non-LTE inversions of Fe i and Ca ii to infer a model atmosphere for selected regions. Milne-Eddington inversions of Fe i serve as photospheric boundary for the MHS model that delivers the three-dimensional field, gas pressure and density. Results. For the line-of-sight component, the MHS chromospheric field generally agrees with the non-LTE inversions and WFA, but tends to be weaker than those when larger in magnitude than 300 G. The observationally inferred transverse component is stronger, especially in magnetically weaker regions, yet the qualitative distribution with height is similar to the MHS results. For either field component the MHS chromospheric field lacks the fine structure derived from the inversions. Furthermore, the MHS model does not recover the magnetic imprint from a set of high fibrils connecting the main polarities. Conclusions. The MHS extrapolation and WFA provide a qualitatively similar chromospheric field, where the azimuth of the former is better aligned with Ca ii 8542 Å fibrils than that of the WFA, especially outside strong-field concentrations. The amount of structure as well as the transverse field strengths are underestimated by the MHS extrapolation. This underscores the importance of considering a chromospheric magnetic field constraint in data-driven modelling of active regions.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.