Paper detail

Satistical Study of the Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections from 1996 to 2014

In this work, we establish an ICME list from 1996 to 2014 based on the in-situ observations from the WIND and ACE satellites. Based on this ICME list, we extend the statistical analysis of the ICMEs to the solar maximum phase of solar cycle 24th. The analysis of the annual variations of the properties of ICMEs show that the number of ICMEs, the number of shocks, the percentage of ICMEs drove shocks, the magnetic field and plasma properties of ICMEs are well correlated with the solar cycle variation. The number of MCs do not show any correlation with sunspot number. But, the percentage of the MCs in ICMEs show good anti-correlation with the sunspot number. By comparison the parameters of MCs with None-MC ICMEs, we found that the MCs are stronger than the None-MC ICMEs . In addition, we compare the parameters of ICMEs with and without shocks. It is found that the ICMEs with shocks are much stronger than the ICME without shocks. Meanwhile, we discuss the distribution of the magnetic field and solar wind plasmas parameters of the sheath regions of ICMEs at first time. We find that the magnetic field and solar wind velocity in the sheath region are higher than them in the ejecta of ICMEs from statistical point of view.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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 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.