Fitting Flux Ropes to a Global MHD Solution: A Comparison of Techniques. Appendix 1

153 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Constraints on the global structure of magnetic clouds: Transverse size and curvature (2006, background): “Although useful in describing local observations, these models may significantly underestimate the true dimension, magnetic flux and helicity of MCs [ Riley et al., 2004; Dasso et al., 2005]; the ambiguities in their results cannot be removed since they involve many free parameters and assumptions.”
On the Magnetic Flux Budget in Low-Corona Magnetic Reconnection and Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections (2007, methodology): “A general comparison between different techniques was presented by Riley et al. (2004), and further discussion is given in this paper, based on our nine case studies.”
A summary of WIND magnetic clouds for years 1995-2003: model-fitted parameters, associated errors and classifications (2006, methodology): “Other models have been used to fit the (local) defining parameters of MCs with various degrees of success (see Riley et al. (2004) for a review of these and some comparisons of the models’ features).”