Appropriate metrics to track the progress over time of thermosphere models, both first principle and semi-empirical, were developed. Secondly, the high quality and high-spatial resolution neutral density data sets of TU Delft covering long intervals of time (i.e. the complete CHAMP, GRACE, GRACE-FO and GOCE mission datasets) were selected. The neutral density observations can then be used to verify model accuracy with respect to latitude-longitude-local time variations, and solar and geomagnetic activity levels and seasonal variations, respectively. The density data and metrics together allow benchmarking of the models, and improvement from one release to the next can be quantified. An assessment tool was implemented at CCMC specifically for storm-time assessment, while global assessment capacity is currently also under development. In this study, we present the results of comparisons with storms from 2001-2022 for the DTM2020, NRLMSISE-00 and JB2008 models. Secondly, the CCMC CAMEL model assessment tool will be shown and the model score cards that it can generate. These score cards allow easy and objective comparison of the performance of thermosphere models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bruinsma et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: