Articles | Volume 9, issue 11
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3961–3974, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3961-2016
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 3961–3974, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3961-2016

Model evaluation paper 08 Nov 2016

Model evaluation paper | 08 Nov 2016

Evaluation of Monte Carlo tools for high energy atmospheric physics

Casper Rutjes et al.

Related authors

Modeling lightning observations from space-based platforms (CloudScat.jl 1.0)
Alejandro Luque, Francisco José Gordillo-Vázquez, Dongshuai Li, Alejandro Malagón-Romero, Francisco Javier Pérez-Invernón, Anthony Schmalzried, Sergio Soler, Olivier Chanrion, Matthias Heumesser, Torsten Neubert, Víctor Reglero, and Nikolai Østgaard
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5549–5566, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5549-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5549-2020, 2020
Short summary
The asymmetric geospace as displayed during the geomagnetic storm on 17 August 2001
Nikolai Østgaard, Jone P. Reistad, Paul Tenfjord, Karl M. Laundal, Theresa Rexer, Stein E. Haaland, Kristian Snekvik, Michael Hesse, Stephen E. Milan, and Anders Ohma
Ann. Geophys., 36, 1577–1596, https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-36-1577-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-36-1577-2018, 2018
Short summary
Evaluation of Monte Carlo tools for high-energy atmospheric physics II: relativistic runaway electron avalanches
David Sarria, Casper Rutjes, Gabriel Diniz, Alejandro Luque, Kevin M. A. Ihaddadene, Joseph R. Dwyer, Nikolai Østgaard, Alexander B. Skeltved, Ivan S. Ferreira, and Ute Ebert
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4515–4535, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4515-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4515-2018, 2018
Short summary
TARANIS XGRE and IDEE detection capability of terrestrial gamma-ray flashes and associated electron beams
David Sarria, Francois Lebrun, Pierre-Louis Blelly, Remi Chipaux, Philippe Laurent, Jean-Andre Sauvaud, Lubomir Prech, Pierre Devoto, Damien Pailot, Jean-Pierre Baronick, and Miles Lindsey-Clark
Geosci. Instrum. Method. Data Syst., 6, 239–256, https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-6-239-2017,https://doi.org/10.5194/gi-6-239-2017, 2017
Short summary
Defining and resolving current systems in geospace
N. Y. Ganushkina, M. W. Liemohn, S. Dubyagin, I. A. Daglis, I. Dandouras, D. L. De Zeeuw, Y. Ebihara, R. Ilie, R. Katus, M. Kubyshkina, S. E. Milan, S. Ohtani, N. Ostgaard, J. P. Reistad, P. Tenfjord, F. Toffoletto, S. Zaharia, and O. Amariutei
Ann. Geophys., 33, 1369–1402, https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-33-1369-2015,https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-33-1369-2015, 2015
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric Sciences
Implementation of a synthetic inflow turbulence generator in idealised WRF v3.6.1 large eddy simulations under neutral atmospheric conditions
Jian Zhong, Xiaoming Cai, and Zheng-Tong Xie
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 323–336, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-323-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-323-2021, 2021
Short summary
Numerical study of the effects of initial conditions and emissions on PM2.5 concentration simulations with CAMx v6.1: a Xi'an case study
Han Xiao, Qizhong Wu, Xiaochun Yang, Lanning Wang, and Huaqiong Cheng
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 223–238, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-223-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-223-2021, 2021
Short summary
A multi-year short-range hindcast experiment with CESM1 for evaluating climate model moist processes from diurnal to interannual timescales
Hsi-Yen Ma, Chen Zhou, Yunyan Zhang, Stephen A. Klein, Mark D. Zelinka, Xue Zheng, Shaocheng Xie, Wei-Ting Chen, and Chien-Ming Wu
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 73–90, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-73-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-73-2021, 2021
Short summary
Ground-based lidar processing and simulator framework for comparing models and observations (ALCF 1.0)
Peter Kuma, Adrian J. McDonald, Olaf Morgenstern, Richard Querel, Israel Silber, and Connor J. Flynn
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 43–72, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-43-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-43-2021, 2021
Development of an Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) aerosol index (AI) data assimilation scheme for aerosol modeling over bright surfaces – a step toward direct radiance assimilation in the UV spectrum
Jianglong Zhang, Robert J. D. Spurr, Jeffrey S. Reid, Peng Xian, Peter R. Colarco, James R. Campbell, Edward J. Hyer, and Nancy L. Baker
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 27–42, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-27-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-27-2021, 2021
Short summary

Cited articles

Adachi, T., Takahashi, Y., Ohya, H., Tsuchiya, F., Yamashita, K., Yamamoto, M., and Hashiguchi, H.: Monitoring of Lightning Activity in Southeast Asia: Scientific Objectives and Strategies, Kyoto Working Papers on Area Studies: G-COE Series, 2008.
Agostinelli, S., Allison, J., Amako, K., et al.: GEANT4: A simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Methods, A506, 250–303, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8, 2003.
Andreo, P.: Monte Carlo techniques in medical radiation physics, Phys. Med. Biol., 36, 861, https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/36/7/001, 1991.
Babich, L., Donskoy, E., Kutsyk, I., and Roussel-Dupré, R.: The feedback mechanism of runaway air breakdown, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L09809, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021744, 2005.
Basaglia, T., Bell, Z., Dressendorfer, P., Larkin, A., and Pia, M.: Writing software or writing scientific articles?, in: Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2007, NSS'07, IEEE, Vol. 1, 219–226, IEEE, 2007.
Download
Short summary
High energy atmospheric physics includes terrestrial gamma-ray flashes, electron–positron beams and gamma-ray glows from thunderstorms. It requires appropriate models for the interaction of energetic particles with the atmosphere. We benchmark general purpose and custom-made codes against each other. We focus on basic tests, namely on the evolution of particles through air in the absence of electric and magnetic fields, providing a first benchmark for present and future custom-made codes.