Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
AI Research Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 71 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 50 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 21 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 19 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 91 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 164 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 449 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Active region chromospheric magnetic fields (2109.02943v1)

Published 7 Sep 2021 in astro-ph.SR

Abstract: 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 {\AA} and Ca ii 8542 {\AA} 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 {\AA} 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.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.