Skip to content

T2.2: Detection boundary characterization #8

@w2naf

Description

@w2naf

Description

Characterize when the HamSCI ionosonde can and cannot detect echoes, and relate this to ionospheric conditions measured by GIRO. This is a scientifically interesting result on its own.

Analysis Required

Detection Statistics

  • For each sounding frequency (3.5, 7.0 MHz), compute fraction of time echoes are detected (overall, day, night)
  • Detection rate as a function of GIRO foF2 (bin by foF2 in 0.5 MHz increments)

Figures

  • Detection probability vs. foF2 for each sounding frequency — should show a transition near the sounding frequency
  • Time-of-day heatmap showing detection rate by hour and frequency
  • Timeline showing echo presence/absence overlaid with GIRO foF2

Threshold Analysis

  • Determine empirical foF2 threshold at which detection probability = 50% for each frequency
  • Compare to theoretical expectation (echo lost when foF2 < sounding frequency)
  • If discrepancy exists, discuss possible causes (D-region absorption, noise floor, antenna pattern, distance to reference Digisonde)

Nighttime Gap

  • Quantify what fraction of nighttime hours have no echoes on each frequency
  • Relate to typical nighttime foF2 values

Acceptance Criteria

  • Detection rate statistics computed for both frequencies
  • Detection probability vs. foF2 plots clearly show the transition
  • Empirical detection thresholds reported and compared to theory
  • Nighttime gap quantified
  • Written interpretation (1 page)

Timeline

Context

Phase 2 of Track 1 validation. This analysis characterizes the instrument's observational coverage. See plans/track1-workplan.md.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

analysisData analysis and scientific interpretationtrack-1-validationTrack 1: Instrument Validation

Type

No type

Projects

Status

Backlog

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions