Paper detail

On the identification of time interval threshold in the twin-CME scenario

Recently it has been suggested that the "twin-CME" scenario Li.etal2012 may be a very effective mechanism in causing extreme Solar Energetic Particle (SEP) events and in particular Ground Level Enhancement (GLE) events. Ding.etal2013 performed a statistical examination of the twin-CME scenario with a total of $126$ fast and wide western Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs). They found that CMEs having a preceding CME with a speed $>$ 300 $km/s$ within $9$ hours from the same active region have larger probability of leading to large SEP events than CMEs that do not have preceding CMEs. The choice of $9$ hours being the time lag $τ$ between the preceding CME and the main CME was based on some crude estimates of the decay time of the turbulence downstream of the shock driven by the preceding CME. In this work, we examine this choice. For the $126$ fast wide CMEs examined in Ding.etal2013, we vary the time lag $τ$ from $1$ hour to $24$ hours with an increment of $1$ hour. By considering three quantities whose values depend on the choice of this time lag $τ$, we show that the choice of $13$ hours for $τ$ is more appropriate. Our study confirms our earlier result that twin CMEs are more likely to lead to large SEP events than single fast CMEs. The results shown here are of great relevance to space weather studies.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors2 topics

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 map preview

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.