the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Prediction of magnetic activities for Solar Cycle 25 using neural networks
Abstract. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence research have shown promising results in addressing scientific and operational challenges related to Space Weather. The abundance of historical solar wind data collected near Earth presents an opportunity to leverage modern scientific methodologies that integrate large datasets and computational modeling. In this study, we analyzed multivariate solar wind data spanning the twenty-third to twenty-fifth solar cycles to develop a predictive model for geomagnetic storms. Our improved long-short-term memory recurrent neural network model with an attention mechanism demonstrated accurate predictions of moderate events between 2023 and 2025, outperforming international reference models. We also evaluated the model's performance in predicting the intense geomagnetic storm of May 2024, which saw a significant Dst index amplitude variation exceeding 400 nT. This research contributes to the advancement of early warning systems, risk mitigation strategies, and offers a new approach to analyzing geomagnetic storms morphology.
- Preprint
(6741 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 01 Oct 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-2569', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Aug 2025
reply
A long term-short memory recurrent neural network (RNN) model is developed using Dst index and solar wind plasma parameters between 1996 and 2022 as a training dataset. The model is validated with the help of the Dst index between 2023 and 2024, and the Dst convolutional neural network (Dst CNN) model. The comparative evaluation of the RNN model, using the Dst index, shows a better performance to the Dst CNN model for moderate storms looking at the correlation coefficients for both models. There is intention in future of enhancing and broadening the capability of the model for the predictions of other indices like Kp and AE.
Major comments:
The validation of the model lacks a reasonable number of moderate and major storms to ascertain its performance compared to the existing model Dst CNN. I suggest choosing between 6 to 10 moderate and major storms outside the period of the training dataset and calculating correlation coefficients and RMSEs between Dst index and predictions of models. A table listing the geomagnetic storms, correlation coefficients and RMSEs for RNN and Dst CNN can show easily the comparative performance of the models.
Some figures have labels that are hardly seen without zooming in the document. It is advisable to increase the font size of the labels. I would suggest that in the second panel of figures 6 and 8 the RNN prediction curve alone can be replaced with the difference between model predictions and Dst index. We can see where big or small differences are during three geomagnetic storm phases.
Minor comments:
Line 45: The citation may be replaced with “Nakano and Kataoka (2022)”.
Line 52: The citation may be replaced with “Sierra Porta et al. (2024)”.
Line 66: The citation may be replaced with “Yan et al. (2024)”.
Line 69: The citation may be replaced with “Yasser et al. (2022)”.
The font size of numbers and labels in Figure 4 may be increased for readability.
Line 221: h(xi).
Line 226: “In Figure 5, an RMSE value below 0.1”. It is not presented or clear in the figure.
Line 227: “in 14 epochs”. Which years are being referred to? I suggest replacing X-axis labels (0…14) with identifiable (real) epochs.
I think the unit for RMSE values in Figures 6-8 is nT. These RMSE values appear to be very small, not representing the visual differences between the curves. It is advisable to check their calculation.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2569-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Thiago Sant Anna, 20 Aug 2025
reply
Dear Referee #1,
Thank you for your comments. I will implement the changes and get back to you soon.
Sincerely,
Thiago Moeda
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2569-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Thiago Sant Anna, 20 Aug 2025
reply
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
355 | 32 | 11 | 398 | 28 | 29 |
- HTML: 355
- PDF: 32
- XML: 11
- Total: 398
- BibTeX: 28
- EndNote: 29
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1