Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Authors: Pezzopane, M.* 
Scotto, C.* 
Title: Can the polarization tagging of the ionogram trace deceive autoscaling methods? The Learmonth case
Journal: Annals of Geophysics 
Series/Report no.: 4/51 (2008)
Publisher: INGV
Issue Date: Aug-2008
Keywords: Ionospheric Monitoring
Subject Classification01. Atmosphere::01.02. Ionosphere::01.02.05. Wave propagation 
01. Atmosphere::01.02. Ionosphere::01.02.06. Instruments and techniques 
Abstract: This paper focuses on the problem of invalid O/X polarization tagging of an ionogram and how this can affect ionogram autoscaling methods. To illustrate this problem, 623 ionograms recorded in March and April 2004 (days 080-105) by the digisonde 256 installed at Learmonth (22.3° S, 114.1° E) were considered. These ionograms, often characterized by very unreliable O/X polarization tagging of the echoes because of unresolved antenna issues, have been autoscaled by both ARTIST 4.2 and Autoscala. Results of comparisons between automatically and manually scaled foF2 data are shown for both programs, considering as acceptable an autoscaled value that lies within 0.5 MHz of the manual value. Autoscala values of foF2 agree with the manually-scaled values for ~99% of ionograms, while ARTIST values of foF2 agree with the manually-scaled values for ~75% of ionograms. While ARTIST was coded on the assumption of valid polarization tagging, the fact remains that it produces invalid results when equipment issues cause invalid tagging. Autoscaling procedures that do not use the polarization tagging will generally work better than ARTIST in such cases. However, these other procedures are susceptible to failure in other situations.
Appears in Collections:Annals of Geophysics
Article published / in press

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
5 pezzopane.pdf3.58 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

Page view(s) 10

checked on May 23, 2022

Download(s) 50

checked on May 23, 2022

Google ScholarTM