Taxonomical musings

In the ‘Object as Subject’ exhibition held at the Stephen Lawrence Gallery, Greenwich University, myself and two other artists showed work which explores the use of the ‘found object’ in their respective practices. My work was selected by the gallery curator David Waterworth. The work exhibited by me, two multi-media pieces and two films, continues my (practice as research) investigation into using everyday objects as starting points for creating work in a variety of mediums including: sculpture, films, installations and multiples. In this work I address a range of subject matters – philosophical, social and cultural. The history of the use of found object in art began in early 20th century European art when Marcel Duchamp and Pablo Picasso independently introduced everyday objects into their practice. My work continues this research.

Reconstruction of geomagnetic activity and near-Earth interplanetary conditions over the past 167 yr – Part 1: A new geomagnetic data composite

We present a new composite of geomagnetic activity which is designed to be as homogeneous in its construction as possible. This is done by only combining data that, by virtue of the locations of the source observatories used, have similar responses to solar wind and IMF (interplanetary magnetic field) variations. This will enable us (in Part 2, Lockwood et al., 2013a) to use the new index to reconstruct the interplanetary magnetic field, B, back to 1846 with a full analysis of errors. Allowance is made for the effects of secular change in the geomagnetic field. The composite uses interdiurnal variation data from Helsinki for 1845–1890 (inclusive) and 1893–1896 and from Eskdalemuir from 1911 to the present. The gaps are filled using data from the Potsdam (1891–1892 and 1897–1907) and the nearby Seddin observatories (1908–1910) and intercalibration achieved using the Potsdam–Seddin sequence. The new index is termed IDV(1d) because it employs many of the principles of the IDV index derived by Svalgaard and Cliver (2010), inspired by the u index of Bartels (1932); however, we revert to using one-day (1d) means, as employed by Bartels, because the use of near-midnight values in IDV introduces contamination by the substorm current wedge auroral electrojet, giving noise and a dependence on solar wind speed that varies with latitude. The composite is compared with independent, early data from European-sector stations, Greenwich, St Petersburg, Parc St Maur, and Ekaterinburg, as well as the composite u index, compiled from 2–6 stations by Bartels, and the IDV index of Svalgaard and Cliver. Agreement is found to be extremely good in all cases, except two. Firstly, the Greenwich data are shown to have gradually degraded in quality until new instrumentation was installed in 1915. Secondly, we infer that the Bartels u index is increasingly unreliable before about 1886 and overestimates the solar cycle amplitude between 1872 and 1883 and this is amplified in the proxy data used before 1872. This is therefore also true of the IDV index which makes direct use of the u index values.

Centennial variations in sunspot number, open solar flux and streamer belt width: 1. correction of the sunspot number record since 1874

We analyse the widely-used international/ Zürich sunspot number record, R, with a view to quantifying a suspected calibration discontinuity around 1945 (which has been termed the “Waldmeier discontinuity” [Svalgaard, 2011]). We compare R against the composite sunspot group data from the Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO) network and the Solar Optical Observing Network (SOON), using both the number of sunspot groups, N{sub}G{\sub}, and the total area of the sunspots, A{sub}G{\sub}. In addition, we compare R with the recently developed interdiurnal variability geomagnetic indices IDV and IDV(1d). In all four cases, linearity of the relationship with R is not assumed and care is taken to ensure that the relationship of each with R is the same before and after the putative calibration change. It is shown the probability that a correction is not needed is of order 10{sup}−8{\sup} and that R is indeed too low before 1945. The optimum correction to R for values before 1945 is found to be 11.6%, 11.7%, 10.3% and 7.9% using A{sub}G{\sub}, N{sub)G{\sub}, IDV, and IDV(1d), respectively. The optimum value obtained by combining the sunspot group data is 11.6% with an uncertainty range 8.1-14.8% at the 2σ level. The geomagnetic indices provide an independent yet less stringent test but do give values that fall within the 2σ uncertainty band with optimum values are slightly lower than from the sunspot group data. The probability of the correction needed being as large as 20%, as advocated by Svalgaard [2011], is shown to be 1.6 × 10{sup}−5{\sup}.

Long-term changes in the solar photosphere associated with changes in the coronal source flux

Using sunspot observations from Greenwich and Mount Wilson, we show that the latitudinal spread of sunspot groups has increased since 1874, in a manner that closely mirrors the long-term (similar to 100 year) changes in the coronal source flux, F-s, as inferred from geomagnetic activity. This latitude spread is shown to be well correlated with the flux emergence rate required by the model of the coronal source flux variation by Solanki er al. [2000]. The time constant for the decay of this open flux is found to be 3.6 +/-0.8 years. Using this value, and quantifying the photospheric flux emergence rate using the latitudinal spread of sunspot groups, the model reproduces the observed coronal source flux variation. The ratio of the 100-year drift to the solar cycle amplitude for the flux emergence rate is found to be half of the same ratio for F-s.

Tests of sunspot number sequences: 3. Effects of regression procedures on the calibration of historic sunspot data

We use sunspot group observations from the Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO) to investigate the effects of intercalibrating data from observers with different visual acuities. The tests are made by counting the number of groups RB above a variable cut-off threshold of observed total whole-spot area (uncorrected for foreshortening) to simulate what a lower acuity observer would have seen. The synthesised annual means of RB are then re-scaled to the full observed RGO group number RA using a variety of regression techniques. It is found that a very high correlation between RA and RB (rAB > 0.98) does not prevent large errors in the intercalibration (for example sunspot maximum values can be over 30 % too large even for such levels of rAB). In generating the backbone sunspot number (RBB), Svalgaard and Schatten (2015, this issue) force regression fits to pass through the scatter plot origin which generates unreliable fits (the residuals do not form a normal distribution) and causes sunspot cycle amplitudes to be exaggerated in the intercalibrated data. It is demonstrated that the use of Quantile-Quantile (“Q  Q”) plots to test for a normal distribution is a useful indicator of erroneous and misleading regression fits. Ordinary least squares linear fits, not forced to pass through the origin, are sometimes reliable (although the optimum method used is shown to be different when matching peak and average sunspot group numbers). However, other fits are only reliable if non-linear regression is used. From these results it is entirely possible that the inflation of solar cycle amplitudes in the backbone group sunspot number as one goes back in time, relative to related solar-terrestrial parameters, is entirely caused by the use of inappropriate and non-robust regression techniques to calibrate the sunspot data.

A new calibrated sunspot group series since 1749: statistics of active day fractions

Although the sunspot-number series have existed since the mid-19th century, they are still the subject of intense debate, with the largest uncertainty being related to the "calibration" of the visual acuity of individual observers in the past. Daisy-chain regression methods are applied to inter-calibrate the observers which may lead to significant bias and error accumulation. Here we present a novel method to calibrate the visual acuity of the key observers to the reference data set of Royal Greenwich Observatory sunspot groups for the period 1900-1976, using the statistics of the active-day fraction. For each observer we independently evaluate their observational thresholds [S_S] defined such that the observer is assumed to miss all of the groups with an area smaller than S_S and report all the groups larger than S_S. Next, using a Monte-Carlo method we construct, from the reference data set, a correction matrix for each observer. The correction matrices are significantly non-linear and cannot be approximated by a linear regression or proportionality. We emphasize that corrections based on a linear proportionality between annually averaged data lead to serious biases and distortions of the data. The correction matrices are applied to the original sunspot group records for each day, and finally the composite corrected series is produced for the period since 1748. The corrected series displays secular minima around 1800 (Dalton minimum) and 1900 (Gleissberg minimum), as well as the Modern grand maximum of activity in the second half of the 20th century. The uniqueness of the grand maximum is confirmed for the last 250 years. It is shown that the adoption of a linear relationship between the data of Wolf and Wolfer results in grossly inflated group numbers in the 18th and 19th centuries in some reconstructions.

Tests of sunspot number sequences: 1. Using ionosonde data

More than 70 years ago it was recognised that ionospheric F2-layer critical frequencies [foF2] had a strong relationship to sunspot number. Using historic datasets from the Slough and Washington ionosondes, we evaluate the best statistical fits of foF2 to sunspot numbers (at each Universal Time [UT] separately) in order to search for drifts and abrupt changes in the fit residuals over Solar Cycles 17-21. This test is carried out for the original composite of the Wolf/Zürich/International sunspot number [R], the new “backbone” group sunspot number [RBB] and the proposed “corrected sunspot number” [RC]. Polynomial fits are made both with and without allowance for the white-light facular area, which has been reported as being associated with cycle-to-cycle changes in the sunspot number - foF2 relationship. Over the interval studied here, R, RBB, and RC largely differ in their allowance for the “Waldmeier discontinuity” around 1945 (the correction factor for which for R, RBB and RC is, respectively, zero, effectively over 20 %, and explicitly 11.6 %). It is shown that for Solar Cycles 18-21, all three sunspot data sequences perform well, but that the fit residuals are lowest and most uniform for RBB. We here use foF2 for those UTs for which R, RBB, and RC all give correlations exceeding 0.99 for intervals both before and after the Waldmeier discontinuity. The error introduced by the Waldmeier discontinuity causes R to underestimate the fitted values based on the foF2 data for 1932-1945 but RBB overestimates them by almost the same factor, implying that the correction for the Waldmeier discontinuity inherent in RBB is too large by a factor of two. Fit residuals are smallest and most uniform for RC and the ionospheric data support the optimum discontinuity multiplicative correction factor derived from the independent Royal Greenwich Observatory (RGO) sunspot group data for the same interval.

Uncertainties in tidally adjusted estimates of sea level rise flooding (bathtub model) for the Greater London

Sea-level rise (SLR) from global warming may have severe consequences for coastal cities, particularly when combined with predicted increases in the strength of tidal surges. Predicting the regional impact of SLR flooding is strongly dependent on the modelling approach and accuracy of topographic data. Here, the areas under risk of sea water flooding for London boroughs were quantified based on the projected SLR scenarios reported in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) fifth assessment report (AR5) and UK climatic projections 2009 (UKCP09) using a tidally-adjusted bathtub modelling approach. Medium- to very high-resolution digital elevation models (DEMs) are used to evaluate inundation extents as well as uncertainties. Depending on the SLR scenario and DEMs used, it is estimated that 3%–8% of the area of Greater London could be inundated by 2100. The boroughs with the largest areas at risk of flooding are Newham, Southwark, and Greenwich. The differences in inundation areas estimated from a digital terrain model and a digital surface model are much greater than the root mean square error differences observed between the two data types, which may be attributed to processing levels. Flood models from SRTM data underestimate the inundation extent, so their results may not be reliable for constructing flood risk maps. This analysis provides a broad-scale estimate of the potential consequences of SLR and uncertainties in the DEM-based bathtub type flood inundation modelling for London boroughs.