Solar-Terrestrial Physics Solar-Terrestrial Physics Солнечно-земная физика 2712-9640 122582 10.12737/szf-122202603 xjoudd Результаты исследований Results of current research Результаты исследований Which latitudes of the Russian Federation may be affected by extreme magnetic storms? Какие широты Российской Федерации могут быть подвержены воздействию экстремальных магнитных бурь? Савельева Наталья Валерьевна Savelieva Natalia Valeryevna nasa2000@ya.ru https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3056-7465 Пилипенко Вячеслав Анатольевич Pilipenko Vyacheslav Anatolievich space.soliton@gmail.com

доктор физико-математических наук;

doctor of physical and mathematical sciences;

 Ягодкина Оксана Ивановна Yagodkina Oksana Ivanovna yagodkina@pgia.ru Институт физики Земли им. О.Ю. Шмидта РАН Москва Россия Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth RAS Moscow Russian Federation Геофизический центр РАН Москва Россия Geophysical Center RAS Moscow Russian Federation Институт физики Земли им. О.Ю. Шмидта РАН Москва Россия Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth RAS Moscow Russian Federation Геофизический центр РАН Москва Россия Geophysical Center RAS Moscow Russian Federation Институт космических исследований Москва Россия Space Research Institute Moscow Russian Federation Полярный геофизический институт Апатиты Россия Polar Geophysical Institute Apatity Russian Federation 12 2 24 37 16 08 2025 22 12 2025 https://naukaru.ru/en/nauka/article/122582/view

Если рассматривать авроральный овал как индикатор положения электроджета, то информация о положении экваториальной границы овала позволяет предсказать, на каких широтах могут наблюдаться наиболее интенсивные вариации геомагнитного поля. Эти вариации являются источником геоиндуцированных токов (ГИТ), представляющих угрозу стабильной работе электроэнергетических систем. Для оценки возможной минимальной широты аврорального овала широко используются модели Старкова-93 (C93), Auroral Precipitation Model (АРМ), и OVATION Prime (OP). Однако базы данных, на основе которых строились эти модели, не включали редкие экстремальные магнитные бури (|Dst|>400 нТл). Оценку минимальной широты экваториальной границы дискретных сияний во время экстремальных бурь предлагает статистическая модель L2025, основанная на свидетельствах очевидцев. Экстраполяции зависимостей широты экваториальной границы овала от интенсивности бури моделей С93 и AРМ при экстремальных возмущениях (|Dst|>400 нТл) расходятся с предсказаниями модели L2025. В новой версии модели распределения авроральных высыпаний APM_GEO были сняты ограничения на уровень магнитной активности по индексам AL и Dst, что дает возможность оценить положение границы высыпаний в периоды суперсуббурь и экстремальных бурь. С целью сопоставления моделей ОР и APM_GEO рассмотрена динамика аврорального овала во время бури 10–11 мая 2024 г. согласно каждой модели и для территории Российской Федерации построены карты экваториальных границ овала для различных фаз бури. Сопоставление показало, что модель ОР, управляемая параметрами межпланетной среды, существенно недооценивает широтное смещение овала по сравнению с моделью APM_GEO. Поскольку интенсивные суббури во время бурь приводят к значительному экваториальному смещению границы овала, то все крупные энергетические сети Российской Федерации могут быть подвержены влиянию ГИТ не только при экстремальных, но и при сильных магнитных бурях при наличии на их фоне интенсивных суббурь.

If we consider the auroral oval as an indicator of the electrojet position, the information about the position of its equatorial boundary allows us to predict the latitudes at which the most intense geomagnetic variations can be observed. These variations are the source of geomagnetically induced currents (GICs), which pose a threat to the stable operation of electric power systems. The Starkov-93 (S93) model, Auroral Precipitation Model (APM), and OVATION Prime (OP) model are widely used to estimate the possible minimum latitude of the oval. However, the databases with the aid of which these models were built did not contain rare extreme magnetic storms (|Dst|>400 nT). As a source of information on auroral latitudes during extreme storms, we employ the statistical model of the minimum latitude of the equatorial boundary of discrete auroras L2025, which is based on observational evidence. Extrapolation of the dependences of the oval’s equatorial boundary latitude on the storm intensity obtained by the S93 model and APM during extreme storms (|Dst|>400 nT) diverge from the predictions of the L2025 model. In the new version of APM (APM_GEO), the limitations to the magnetic activity level in the AL and Dst indices were removed, which makes it possible to estimate the location of the precipitation boundary during super substorms and extreme storms. To compare the OP model with APM_GEO, we have examined the dynamics of the auroral oval during the May 10–11, 2024 magnetic storm and have constructed maps of the position of the oval equatorial boundaries for different storm phases for the territory of the Russian Federation. As revealed from the comparison with APM_GEO, the OP model driven by interplanetary medium parameters significantly underestimates latiudinal shift of the oval. Since intense substorms during storms lead to a significant equatorial shift of the oval boundary, all large energy grids of the be affected by GICs not only during extreme, but also during strong magnetic storms in the presence of intense substorms against their background.

 космическая погода магнитные бури геоиндуцированные токи авроральный овал space weather magnetic storms geomagnetically induced currents auroral oval Работа поддержана грантом РНФ 21-77-30010-П The work was financially supported by RSF (grant No. 21-77-30010-P)

Воробьев В.Г., Ягодкина О.И. Влияние магнитной активности на глобальное распределение зон авроральных вторжений. Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2005, т. 45, № 4, с. 467–473. Apatenkov S.V., Pilipenko V.A., Gordeev E.I., et al. Auroral omega bands are a significant cause of large geomagnetically induced currents. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2020, vol. 47, e2019GL086677. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086677. Воробьев В.Г., Ягодкина О.И. Динамика авроральных высыпаний в периоды сильных магнитных бурь. Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2007, т. 47, № 2, с. 198–205. Baker D.N., Balstad R., Bodeau J.M., et al. Severe space weather events — Understanding societal and economic impacts. The National Academy Press, Washington, 2008. https://doi.org/10.17226/12507. Воробьев В.Г., Сахаров Я.А., Ягодкина О.И. и др. Геоиндуцированные токи и их связь с положением западной электроструи и границами авроральных высыпаний. Труды Кольского научного центра РАН. 2018. т. 5, вып. 4, с. 16–28. https://doi.org/10.25702/KSC.2307-5252.2018.9.5.16-28. Blake S.P., Pulkkinen A., Schuck P.W., et al. Estimating maximum extent of auroral equatorward boundary using historical and simulated surface magnetic field data. J. Geophys. Res. 2021, vol. 126, iss. 2, e2020JA028284. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA028284. Воробьев В.Г., Ягодкина О.И., Мельник М.Н., Мингалев О.В. Планетарное распределение характеристик электронных и ионных высыпаний в зависимости от уровней магнитной активности. Интерактивная модель АРМ_ГЕО. Physics of Auroral Phenomena. Proc. XLVI Annual Seminar. Apatity, 2023, c. 127–136. https://doi.org/10.51981/2588-0039.2023.46.028. Boroyev R.N., Vasiliev M.S., Baishev D.G. The relationship between geomagnetic indices and the interplanetary medium parameters in magnetic storm main phases during CIR and ICME events. J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 2020, vol. 204, 105290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2020.105290. Воробьев В.Г., Ягодкина О.И., Антонова Е.Е. Ночные авроральные высыпания при экстремальных уровнях геомагнитной активности. Physics of Auroral Phenomena, Proc. XLVIII Annual Seminar. Apatity. 2025, с. 54–58. https://doi.org/10.51981/2588-0039.2025.48.012. Boteler D.H. Geomagnetic hazards to conducting networks. Natural Hazards. 2003, vol. 28, iss. 2, pp. 537–561. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022902713136. Гвишиани А.Д., Лукьянова Р.Ю. Оценка влияния геомагнитных возмущений на траекторию наклонно-направленного бурения глубоких скважин в Арктическом регионе. Физика Земли. 2018, № 4, с. 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0002333718040051. Caraballo R., Gonzalez-Esparza J.A., Pacheco C.R., et al. The impact of geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) on the Mexican power grid: Numerical modeling and observations from the 10 May 2024 geomagnetic storm. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2025, vol. 52, iss. 4, e2024GL112749. https://doi.org/10.1029/2024GL112749. Зверев В.Л., Фельдштейн Я.И., Воробьев В.Г. Авроральное свечение к экватору от овала полярных сияний. Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2012, т. 52, № 1, с. 64–72. Carbary J.F., Sotirelis T., Newell P.T., Meng C.-I. Auroral boundary correlations between UVI and DMSP. J. Geophys. Res. 2003, vol. 108, iss. A1, pp. SIA2-1–SIA2-7. 10.1029/2002JA009378. Костарев Д.В., Пилипенко В.А., Козырева О.В. Геомагнитный мониторинг для снижения риска для трубопроводов от космической погоды. Наука и технологии трубопроводного транспорта нефти и нефтепродуктов. 2023, т. 13, № 1, с. 38–49. https://doi.org/10.28999/2541-9595-2023-13-1-38-49. Chisham G., Burrell A.G., Thomas E.G., Chen Y.-J. Ionospheric boundaries derived from auroral images. J. Geophys. Res. 2022, vol. 127, iss. 7, e2022JA030622. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JA03062. Мазур В.А., Шухман И.Г. К выводу соотношения Десслера—Паркера—Скопке. Солнечно-земная физика. 2015, Т. 1, №. 2, с. 80–84. https://doi.org/10.12737/7495. Despirak I., Setsko P., Lubchich A., et al. Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) during strong geomagnetic storm on 10–12 May 2024. Adv. Space Res. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.06.081. Мягкова И.М., Рязанцева М.О., Антонова Е.Е., Марьин Б.В. Возрастания потоков высыпающихся энергичных электронов на границе внешнего радиационного пояса Земли и положение границ аврорального овала. Космические исследования. 2010, т. 48, № 2, с. 169–177. Dimmock A.P., Rosenqvist L., Hall J.-O., et al. The GIC and geomagnetic response over Fennoscandia to the 7–8 September 2017 geomagnetic storm. Space Weather. 2019, vol. 17, iss. 7, pp. 989–1010. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002132. Пилипенко В.А. Воздействие космической погоды на наземные технологические системы. Солнечно-земная физика. 2021, т. 7, № 3, с. 72–110. https://doi.org/10.12737/szf-73202106 / Pilipenko V.A. Impact of space weather on ground-based technological systems. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 2021, vol. 7, iss. 3, pp. 68–104. https://doi.org/10.12737/stp-73202106. Edemskiy I.K., Yasyukevich Yu.V. Auroral oval boundary dynamics on the nature of geomagnetic storm. Remote Sens. 2022, vol. 14, 5486. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14215486. Пилипенко В.А., Черников А.А., Соловьев А.А. и др. Влияние космической погоды на надежность функционирования транспортных систем на высоких широтах. Russian Journal of Earth Sciences. 2023a, т. 23, № 2, ES2008. https://doi.org/10.2205//2023ES000824. Effects of Space Weather on Technology Infrastructure. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004, 343 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2754-0. Пилипенко В.А., Гвишиани А.Д., Соловьев А.А., Розенберг И.Н. Космическая погода и железные дороги. Земля и Вселенная. 2023б, № 6, с. 22–34. https://doi.org/10.7868/S0044394823060026. Engebretson M.J., Steinmetz E.S., Posch J.L., et al. Nighttime magnetic perturbation events observed in Arctic Canada: 2. Multiple-instrument observations. J. Geophys. Res. 2019, vol. 124, pp. 7459–7476. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JA026797. Старков Г.В. Планетарная морфология сияний. Магнитосферно-ионосферная физика. Краткий справочник. СПб.: Наука, 1993, с. 85–90. Evdokimova M.A., Petrukovich A.A. Estimation of westward auroral electrojet current with magnetometer chain data. Ann. Geophys. 2020, vol. 38, pp. 109–121. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-38-109-2020. Старков Г.В. Математическое описание границ аврорального свечения. Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 1994, т. 34, № 3, с. 80–86. Feldstein Ya.I. Some issues of the morphology of auroras and magnetic disturbances at high latitudes. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 1963, vol. 3, iss. 2, pp. 227–239. (In Russian). Тверская Л.В. Диагностика магнитосферы по релятивистским электронам внешнего пояса и проникновению солнечных протонов (обзор). Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 2011, т. 51, № 1, с. 8–24. Feldstein Y.I., Gromova L.I., Grafe A., et al. Dynamics of the auroral electrojets and their mapping to the magnetosphere. Radiation Measurements. 1999, vol. 30, iss. 5, pp. 579–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1350-4487(99)00219-X. Фельдштейн Я.И. Некоторые вопросы морфологии полярных сияний и магнитных возмущений в высоких широтах. Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 1963, т. 3, № 2, с. 227–239. Gary J.B., Zanetti L.J., Anderson B.J., et al. Identification of auroral oval boundaries from in situ magnetic field measurements. J. Geophys. Res. 1998, vol. 103, iss. A3, pp. 4187–4197. https://doi.org/10.1029/97JA02395. Хорошева О.В. Пространственно-временное распределение полярных сияний и их связь с высокоширотными геомагнитными возмущениями. Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 1961, т. 1, № 5, с. 695–701. Gonzalez W.D., Echer E., Tsurutani B.T., et al. Interplanetary origin of intense, superintensive and extreme geomagnetic storms. Space Sci. Rev. 2011, vol. 158, iss. 1, pp. 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-010-9715-2. Хорошева О.В. Магнитосферные возмущения и связанная с ними динамика ионосферных электроструй, полярных сияний и плазмопаузы. Геомагнетизм и аэрономия. 1987, т. 27, № 5, с. 804–811. Gvishiani A.D., Lukyanova R.Yu. Estimating the influence of geomagnetic disturbances on the trajectory of the directional drilling of deep wells in the Arctic region. Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth. 2018, vol. 54, iss. 4, pp. 554–564. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1069351318040055. Ясюкевич Ю.В., Едемский И.К., Перевалова Н.П., Полякова А.С. Отклик ионосферы на гелио- и геофизические возмущающие факторы по данным GPS. Иркутск: Изд-во ИГУ, 2013, 259 с. Hapgood M.A. Prepare for the coming space weather storm. Nature. 2012, vol. 484, pp. 311–313. https://doi.org/10.1038/484311. Apatenkov S.V., Pilipenko V.A., Gordeev E.I., et al. Auroral omega bands are a significant cause of large geomagnetically induced currents. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2020, vol. 47, e2019GL086677. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL086677. Hiyadutuje A., Bilitza D., Ojebisi T., et al. Assessment of the performance of the IRI’s auroral oval boundary model as applied to the Mother’s Day G5 storm during 10–13 May 2024. Adv. Space Res. 2025, vol. 76, iss. 12, pp. 7241–7250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.04.003. Baker D.N., Balstad R., Bodeau J.M., et al. Severe space weather events — Understanding societal and economic impacts. The National Academy Press, Washington, 2008. https://doi.org/10.17226/12507. Johnsen M.G. Real-time determination and monitoring of the auroral electrojet boundaries. J. Space Weather Space Climate. 2013, vol. 3, A28. https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2013050. Blake S.P., Pulkkinen A., Schuck P.W., et al. Estimating maximum extent of auroral equatorward boundary using historical and simulated surface magnetic field data. J. Geophys. Res. 2021, vol. 126, iss. 2, e2020JA028284. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA028284. Kataoka R., Ngwira C. Extreme geomagnetically induced currents. Progress in Earth and Planetary Science. 2016, vol. 3, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-016-0101-x. Boroyev R.N., Vasiliev M.S., Baishev D.G. The relationship between geomagnetic indices and the interplanetary medium parameters in magnetic storm main phases during CIR and ICME events. J. Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys. 2020, vol. 204, 105290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2020.105290. Khorosheva O.V. Spatio-temporal distribution of polar auroras and their relationship with high-latitude geomagnetic disturbances. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 1961, vol. 1, iss. 5, pp. 695–701. (In Russian). Boteler D.H. Geomagnetic hazards to conducting networks. Natural Hazards. 2003, vol. 28, iss. 2, pp. 537–561. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022902713136. Khorosheva O.V. Magnetospheric disturbances and the associated dynamics of ionospheric electrojets, polar auroras and plasmapause. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 1987, vol. 27, iss. 5, pp. 804–811. (In Russian). Caraballo R., Gonzalez-Esparza J.A., Pacheco C.R., et al. The impact of geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) on the Mexican power grid: Numerical modeling and observations from the 10 May 2024 geomagnetic storm. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2025, vol. 52, iss. 4, e2024GL112749. https://doi.org/10.1029/2024GL112749. Kostarev D.V., Pilipenko V.A., Kozyreva O.V. Geomagnetic monitoring to mitigate risk to pipelines from space weather. Science & Technologies: Oil and Oil Products Pipeline Transportation. 2023, vol. 13, iss. 1, pp. 38–49. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.28999/2541-9595-2023-13-1-38-49. Carbary J.F., Sotirelis T., Newell P.T., Meng C.-I. Auroral boundary correlations between UVI and DMSP. J. Geophys. Res. 2003, vol. 108, iss. A1, pp. SIA2-1–SIA2-7. https://doi.org/10.1029/2002JA009378. Kozyreva O.V., Pilipenko V.A., Engebretson M.J., et al. Correspondence between the ULF wave power distribution and auroral oval. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 2016, vol. 2, iss. 2, pp. 46–65. https://doi.org/10.12737/20999. Chisham G., Burrell A.G., Thomas E.G., Chen Y.-J. Ionospheric boundaries derived from auroral images. J. Geophys. Res. 2022, vol. 127, iss. 7, e2022JA030622. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JA03062. Kozyreva O., Pilipenko V., Belakhovsky V., Sakharov Ya. Ground geomagnetic field and GIC response to March 17, 2015, storm. Earth, Planets and Space. 2018, vol. 70, 157. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-018-0933-2. Despirak I., Setsko P., Lubchich A., et al. Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) during strong geomagnetic storm on 10–12 May 2024. Adv. Space Res. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.06.081. Love J.J. Extreme-event magnetic storm probabilities derived from rank statistics of historical Dst intensities for solar cycles 14–24. Space Weather. 2021, vol. 19, iss. 4, e2020SW002579. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020SW002579. Dimmock A.P., Rosenqvist L., Hall J.-O., et al. The GIC and geomagnetic response over Fennoscandia to the 7–8 September 2017 geomagnetic storm. Space Weather. 2019, vol. 17, iss. 7, pp. 989–1010. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018SW002132. Love J.J. Mann I.R., Qvick T., Mursula K. What is the lowest latitude of discrete aurorae during superstorms? Space Weather. 2025, vol. 23, e2024SW004286. https://doi.org/10.1029/2024SW004286. Edemskiy I.K., Yasyukevich Y.V. Auroral oval boundary dynamics on the nature of geomagnetic storm. Remote Sens. 2022, vol. 14, 5486. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14215486. Machol J.L., Green J.C., Redmon R.J., et al. Evaluation of OVATION prime as a forecast model for visible aurorae. Space Weather. 2012, vol. 10, S03005. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011SW000746. Effects of Space Weather on Technology Infrastructure. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004, 343 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2754-0. Mazur V.A., Shukhman I.G. On the derivation of Dessler—Parker—Sckopke relation. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 2015. vol. 1, iss. 2, pp. 80–84. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.12737/7495. Engebretson M.J., Steinmetz E.S., Posch J.L., et al. Nighttime magnetic perturbation events observed in Arctic Canada: 2. Multiple-instrument observations. J. Geophys. Res. 2019, vol. 124, pp. 7459–7476. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JA026797. Myagkova I.M., Ryazantseva M.O., Antonova E.E., Marjin B.V. Enhancements of fluxes of precipitating energetic electrons on the boundary of the outer radiation belt of the Earth and position of the auroral oval boundaries. Space Res. 2010, vol. 48, pp. 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0010952510020061. Evdokimova M.A., Petrukovich A.A. Estimation of westward auroral electrojet current with magnetometer chain data. Ann. Geophys. 2020, vol. 38, pp. 109–121. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-38-109-2020. Newell P.T., Sotirelis T., Liou K., et al. A nearly universal solar wind‐magnetosphere coupling function inferred from 10 magnetospheric state variables. J. Geophys. Res. 2007, vol. 112, A01206. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JA012015. Feldstein Y.I., Gromova L.I., Grafe A., et al. Dynamics of the auroral electrojets and their mapping to the magnetosphere. Radiation Measurements. 1999, vol. 30, iss. 5, pp. 579–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1350-4487(99)00219-X. Newell P.T., Sotirelis T., Wing S. Diffuse, monoenergetic, and broadband aurora: The global precipitation budget. J. Geophys. Res. 2009, vol. 114, A09207. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JA014326. Gary J.B., Zanetti L.J., Anderson B.J., et al. Identification of auroral oval boundaries from in situ magnetic field measurements. J. Geophys. Res. 1998, vol. 103, iss. A3, pp. 4187–4197. https://doi.org/10.1029/97JA02395. Newell P.T., Sotirelis T., Wing S. Seasonal variations in diffuse, monoenergetic, and broadband aurora. J. Geophys. Res. 2010, vol. 115, A03216. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JA014805. Gonzalez W.D., Echer E., Tsurutani B.T., et al. Interplanetary origin of intense, superintensive and extreme geomagnetic storms. Space Sci. Rev. 2011, vol. 158, iss. 1, pp. 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-010-9715-2. Newell P.T., Liou K., Zhang Y., et al. OVATION Prime-2013: Extension of auroral precipitation model to higher disturbance levels. Space Weather. 2014, vol. 12, pp. 368–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014SW001056. Hapgood M.A. Prepare for the coming space weather storm. Nature. 2012, vol. 484, pp. 311–313. https://doi.org/10.1038/484311. Pallocchia G., Amata E., Consolini G., et al. Geomagnetic Dst index forecast based on IMF data only. Ann. Geophys. 2006, vol. 24, pp. 989–999. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-24-989-2006. Hiyadutuje A., Bilitza D., Ojebisi T., et al. Assessment of the performance of the IRI’s auroral oval boundary model as applied to the Mother’s Day G5 storm during 10–13 May 2024. Adv. Space Res. 2025, vol. 76, iss. 12, pp. 7241–7250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.04.003. Pilipenko V., Yagova N., Romanova N., Allen J. Statistical relationships between the satellite anomalies at geostationary orbits and high-energy particles. Adv. Space Res. 2006, vol. 37, iss. 6, pp. 1192–1205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2005.03.152. Johnsen M.G. Real-time determination and monitoring of the auroral electrojet boundaries. J. Space Weather Space Climate. 2013, vol. 3, A28. https://doi.org/10.1051/swsc/2013050. Pilipenko V.A. Impact of space weather on ground-based technological systems. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 2021, vol. 7, iss. 3, pp. 68–104. https://doi.org/10.12737/stp-73202106. Kataoka R., Ngwira C. Extreme geomagnetically induced currents. Progress in Earth and Planetary Science. 2016, vol. 3, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-016-0101-x. Pilipenko V.A., Chernikov A.A., Soloviev A.A., et al. Influence of space weather on the reliability of the transport system functioning at high latitudes. Russian Journal of Earth Sciences. 2023a, vol. 23, no. 2, ES2008. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.2205//2023ES000824. Kozyreva O.V., Pilipenko V.A., Engebretson M.J., et al. Correspondence between the ULF wave power distribution and auroral oval. Solar-Terr. Phys. 2016, vol. 2, iss. 2, pp. 46–65. https://doi.org/10.12737/20999. Pilipenko V.A., Gvishiani A.D., Soloviev A.A., Rosenberg I.N. Space weather and railways. Earth and the Universe. 2023b, iss. 6, pp. 22–34. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.7868/S0044394823060026. Kozyreva O., Pilipenko V., Belakhovsky V., Sakharov Y. Ground geomagnetic field and GIC response to March 17, 2015, storm. Earth, Planets and Space. 2018, vol. 70, 157. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-018-0933-2. Pilipenko V.A., Kozyreva O.V., Belakhovsky V.B., et al. What should we know to predict geomagnetically induced currents in power transmission lines? Russian Journal of Earth Sciences. 2024, vol. 24, ES6006. https://doi.org/10.2205/2024es000954. Love J.J. Extreme-event magnetic storm probabilities derived from rank statistics of historical Dst intensities for solar cycles 14–24. Space Weather. 2021, vol. 19, iss. 4, e2020SW002579. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020SW002579. Pulkkinen A., Bernabeu E., Eichner J., et al. Generation of 100-year geomagnetically induced current scenarios. Space Weather, 2012, vol. 10, iss. 4, S04003. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011SW000750. Love J.J., Mann I.R., Qvick T., Mursula K. What is the lowest latitude of discrete aurorae during superstorms? Space Weather. 2025, vol. 23, e2024SW004286. https://doi.org/10.1029/2024SW004286. Shepherd S.G. Altitude‐adjusted corrected geomagnetic coordinates: Definition and functional approximations. J. Geophys. Res. 2014, vol. 119, pp. 7501–7521. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JA020264. Machol J.L., Green J.C., Redmon R.J., et al. Evaluation of OVATION prime as a forecast model for visible aurorae. Space Weather. 2012, vol. 10, S03005. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011SW000746. Sotirelis T., Newell P.T. Boundary-oriented electron precipitation model. J. Geophys. Res. 2000, vol. 105, iss. A8, pp. 18655–18673. https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JA000269. Newell P.T., Sotirelis T., Liou K., et al. A nearly universal solar wind‐magnetosphere coupling function inferred from 10 magnetospheric state variables. J. Geophys. Res. 2007, vol. 112, A01206. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JA012015. Spogli L., Alberti T., Bagiacchi P., et al. The effects of the May 2024 Mother’s Day superstorm over the Mediterranean sector: from data to public communication. Ann. Geophys. 2024, vol. 67, iss. 2, PA218. https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-9117. Newell P.T., Sotirelis T., Wing S. Diffuse, monoenergetic, and broadband aurora: The global precipitation budget. J. Geophys. Res. 2009, vol. 114, A09207. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JA014326. Starkov G.V. Planetary morphology of auroras. Magnetospheric-Ionospheric Physics. Brief Handbook. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 1993, pp. 85–90. (In Russian). Newell P.T., Sotirelis T., Wing S. Seasonal variations in diffuse, monoenergetic, and broadband aurora. J. Geophys. Res. 2010, vol. 115, A03216. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JA014805. Starkov G.V. Mathematical description of the auroral oval boundaries. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 1994, vol. 34, iss. 3, pp. 80–86. (In Russian). Newell P.T., Liou K., Zhang Y., et al. OVATION Prime-2013: Extension of auroral precipitation model to higher disturbance levels. Space Weather. 2014, vol. 12, pp. 368–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014SW001056. Tverskaya L.V. Diagnostics of the magnetosphere based on the outer belt relativistic electrons and penetration of solar protons: A review. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 2011, vol. 51, iss. 1, pp. 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793211010142. Pallocchia G., Amata E., Consolini G., et al. Geomagnetic Dst index forecast based on IMF data only. Ann. Geophys. 2006, vol. 24, pp. 989–999. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-24-989-2006. Vorobjev V.G., Yagodkina O.I. Effect of magnetic activity on the global distribution of auroral precipitation zone. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 2005, vol. 45, iss. 4, pp. 438–444. (In Russian). Pilipenko V., Yagova N., Romanova N., Allen J. Statistical relationships between the satellite anomalies at geostationary orbits and high-energy particles. Adv. Space Res. 2006, vol. 37, iss. 6, pp. 1192–1205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2005.03.152. Vorobjev V.G., Yagodkina O.I. Auroral precipitation dynamics during strong magnetic storms. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 2007, vol. 47, iss. 2, pp. 185–192. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793207020065. Pilipenko V.A., Kozyreva O.V., Belakhovsky V.B., et al. What should we know to predict geomagnetically induced currents in power transmission lines? Russian Journal of Earth Sciences. 2024, vol. 24, ES6006. https://doi.org/10.2205/2024es000954. Vorobjev V.G., Yagodkina O.I., Katkalov Y. Auroral precipitation model and its applications to ionospheric and magnetospheric studies. J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 2013, vol. 102, pp. 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2013.05.007. Pulkkinen A., Bernabeu E., Eichner J., et al. Generation of 100-year geomagnetically induced current scenarios. Space Weather. 2012, vol. 10, iss. 4, S04003. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011SW000750. Vorobjev V.G., Sakharov Ya.A., Yagodkina O.I., et al. Geomagnetically induced currents and their relationship with locations of westward electrojet and auroral precipitation boundaries. Transactions of the Kola Science Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2018, vol. 5, iss. 4, pp. 16–28. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.25702/KSC.2307-5252.2018.9.5.16-28. Shepherd S.G. Altitude‐adjusted corrected geomagnetic coordinates: Definition and functional approximations. J. Geophys. Res. 2014, vol. 119, pp. 7501–7521. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JA020264. Vorobev A.V., Pilipenko V.A., Krasnoperov R.I., et al. Short-term forecast of the auroral oval position on the basis of the “virtual globe” technology. Russian J. Earth Science. 2020a, vol. 20, ES6001. https://doi.org/10.2205/2020ES000721. Sotirelis T., Newell P.T. Boundary-oriented electron precipitation model. J. Geophys. Res. 2000, vol. 105, iss. A8, pp. 18655–18673. https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JA000269. Vorobev A.V., Pilipenko V.A., Reshetnikov A.G., et al. Web-oriented visualization of auroral oval geophysical parameters. Scientific Visualization. 2020b, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 108–118. https://doi.org/10.26583/sv.12.3.10. Spogli L., Alberti T., Bagiacchi P., et al. The effects of the May 2024 Mother’s Day superstorm over the Mediterranean sector: from data to public communication. Ann. Geophys. 2024, vol. 67, iss. 2, PA218. https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-9117. Vorobjev V.G., Yagodkina O.I., Melnik M.N., Mingalev O.V. Planetary distribution of characteristics of electron and ion precipitation depending on the levels of magnetic activity. Interactive model APM_GEO. Physics of Auroral Phenomena. Proc. XLVI Annual Seminar. Apatity, 2023, pp. 127–136. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.51981/2588-0039.2023.46.028. Vorobjev V.G., Yagodkina O.I., Katkalov Y. Auroral precipitation model and its applications to ionospheric and magnetospheric studies. J. Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys. 2013, vol. 102, pp. 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2013.05.007. Vorobiev V.G., Yagodkina O.I., Antonova E.E. Nightside auroral precipitations under extreme levels of geomagnetic activity. Physics of Auroral Phenomena. Proc. XLVIII Annual Seminar. Apatity, 2025, pp. 54–58. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.51981/2588-0039.2025.48.012. Vorobev A.V., Pilipenko V.A., Krasnoperov R.I., et al. Short-term forecast of the auroral oval position on the basis of the “virtual globe” technology. Russian J. Earth Science. 2020a, vol. 20, ES6001. https://doi.org/10.2205/2020ES000721. Walker S.J., Laundal K.M., Reistad J.P., et al. A comparison of auroral oval proxies with the boundaries of the auroral electrojets. Space Weather. 2024, vol. 22, iss. 4, e2023SW003689. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023SW003689. Vorobev A.V., Pilipenko V.A., Reshetnikov A.G., et al. Web-oriented visualization of auroral oval geophysical parameters. Scientific Visualization. 2020b, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 108–118. https://doi.org/10.26583/sv.12.3.10. Woodroffe J.R., Morley S.K., Jordanova V.K., et al. The latitudinal variation of geoelectromagnetic disturbances during large (Dst≤–100 nT) geomagnetic storms. Space Weather. 2016, vol. 14, iss. 9, pp. 668–681. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016SW001376. Walker S.J., Laundal K.M., Reistad J.P., et al. A comparison of auroral oval proxies with the boundaries of the auroral electrojets. Space Weather. 2024, vol. 22, iss. 4, e2023SW003689. https://doi.org/10.1029/2023SW003689. Xiong C., Lühr H., Wang H., Johnsen M.G. Determining the boundaries of the auroral oval from CHAMP field-aligned current signatures — Part 1. Ann. Geophys. 2014, vol. 32, iss. 6, pp. 609–622. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-32-609-2014. Woodroffe J.R., Morley S.K., Jordanova V.K., et al. The latitudinal variation of geoelectromagnetic disturbances during large (Dst≤–100 nT) geomagnetic storms. Space Weather. 2016, vol. 14, iss. 9, pp. 668–681. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016SW001376. Yagodkina O.I., Despirak I.V., Vorobjev V.G. Spatial distribution of auroral precipitation during storms caused by magnetic clouds. J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys. 2012, vol. 77, pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2011.06.009. Xiong C., Lühr H., Wang H., Johnsen M.G. Determining the boundaries of the auroral oval from CHAMP field-aligned current signatures — Part 1. Ann. Geophys. 2014, vol. 32, iss. 6, pp. 609–622. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-32-609-2014. Yasyukevich Yu.V., Edemskiy I.K., Perevalova N.P., Polyakova A.S. Response of the Ionosphere to Helio- and Geophysical Disturbances According to GPS Data. Irkutsk, Irkutsk State University Publ., 2013. 259 p. (In Russian). Yagodkina O.I., Despirak I.V., Vorobjev V.G. Spatial distribution of auroral precipitation during storms caused by magnetic clouds. J. Atmos. Solar-Terr. Phys. 2012, vol. 77, pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2011.06.009. Zou Y., Dowell C., Ferdousi B., et al. Auroral drivers of large dB/dt during geomagnetic storms. Space Weather. 2022, vol. 20, iss. 11, e2022SW003121. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022SW003121. Zou Y., Dowell C., Ferdousi B., et al. Auroral drivers of large dB/dt during geomagnetic storms. Space Weather. 2022, vol. 20, iss. 11, e2022SW003121. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022SW003121. Zverev V.L., Feldshtein Ya.I., Vorobjev V.G. Auroral glow to the equator from the polar auroral oval. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy. 2012, vol. 52, iss. 1, pp. 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793212010173. URL: http://apm.pgia.ru/data (дата обращения 12 декабря 2025 г.). URL: http://apm.pgia.ru/data (accessed December 12, 2025). URL: https://pgia.ru/data/spaceweather/ (дата обращения 12 декабря 2025 г.). URL: https://pgia.ru/data/spaceweather/ (accessed December 12, 2025). URL: https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/vitmo/cgm.html (дата обращения 12 декабря 2025 г.). URL: https://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/vitmo/cgm.html (accessed December 12, 2025). URL: https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/aurora-30-minute-forecast (дата обращения 12 декабря 2025 г.). URL: https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/aurora-30-minute-forecast (accessed December 12, 2025).