 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 345, 1006-1010 (1999)
2. Basis function and cycle shape parameters
For our analysis, we use quarterly averages of the sunspot areas.
They extend from the year 1875 to 1996 and consist of two parts having
different reliability. The first part comes from the Greenwich
Photoheliographic Results, extending from 1875 to 1971, but the graph
given by White & Trotter (1976) was used as we have no primary
digital data. Five points divided one year of the abscissa into four
equidistance parts in the enlarged graph, then we regarded the average
of coordinate values of adjacent two points as quarterly average of
the corresponding time. The rest comes from sunspot observations of
Yunnan Observatory (Hong & Wang, 1988). The Greenwich
Photoheliographic Results are available until the year 1976, a
comparison of the first part with the second was done for the
overlapping period (1971 to 1976). Deviation between the two parts is
less than , and for most values of
sunspot areas it is less than . These
quarterly averages are plotted in Fig. 1 for the entire interval
(1875-1996).
![[FIGURE]](img5.gif) |
Fig. 1. Quarterly averages of the sunspot areas for 1875 to 1996. This illustrates the cyclic behavior of the sunspot areas and shows the variations in size and shape of each sunspot cycle. A comparison of the sunspot data and the two-parameter functional fit for the cycles 12-22 is given too (details are given late in the text). The thin line represents the data, the thick dotted line represents the two-parameter fit for each cycle.
|
Inspection of Fig. 1 reveals that individual cycles show a wide
range of temporal behavior. For example, some cycles (like 12-16, and
20) are small in amplitude (about half the size of cycle 19), while
others are considerably larger. Most cycles show substantial asymmetry
with the rise to maximum being faster than the fall to minimum.
Although the average cycle length (minimum to minimum) is about 11
years, individual cycles vary in length from about 9 to 14 years. All
these properties are similar to the characteristics of the solar
cycles described by the international sunspot relative numbers.
Initiated by the work of Hathaway, et al. (1994), a function of the
form
![[EQUATION]](img7.gif)
is proposed to describe the shape of the sunspot area cycles, where
parameter a represents the amplitude, b is related to
the time from minimum to maximum, c gives the asymmetry of the
cycle, denotes the starting time.
Here we use a linear term of in the
exponential function of the equation instead of the quadratic term
used by Hathaway, et al. (1994). This function reproduces both the
rise and decay portions of the sunspot cycle. We determined the
best-fit parameters for each cycle using a nonlinear least-squares
fitting algorithm in which all four parameters can vary. In attempting
to fit each cycle with the four-parameter basic function we found that
the process initially gave parameters with large uncertainties and the
parameter b could be fixed at a constant value for the 11
complete cycles. Although slight variations of the values of the
parameter b occur from cycle to cycle, they appear to be
unrelated to the other parameters and the results are consistent with
taking a simple value of for all
cycles. This effectively reduces the number of parameters by one and
also stabilizes the fitting procedure by removing one degree of
freedom. Eq. (1) becomes a function of three parameters. Then we fix
the parameter to reproduce the shape
of the sunspot area cycle again. Table 1 gives summary of
best-fit parametric values for the three-parameter function.
Examination of the best-fit parametric values for each cycle shows
that parameters a and c are related. Fig. 2 shows
parameter c as a function of parameter a for all 11
cycles. A strong relationship between a and c is clearly
seen, and the best fit to this relationship is given by a two-order
polynomial expression of the form
![[EQUATION]](img12.gif)
![[FIGURE]](img15.gif) |
Fig. 2. Parameter c plotted as a function of parameter a (amplitude) for all the cycles 12-22. The functional fit given by Eq. (2) is represented by the thick line through the data points marked by symbol .
|
![[TABLE]](img17.gif)
Table 1. Summary of the cycle shape parametric values
The correlation coefficient . This
effectively reduces again the number of parameters by one, leaving
only two. Then the two-parameter fit is attempted to be done for all
11 cycles. Table 1 also lists the best-fit parametric values for
the two-parameter function. Fig. 1 shows a comparison of the sunspot
area data and the two-parameter functional fit for the years 1875 to
1996 (cycles 12-22). A measure of the goodness-of-fit is given in the
fifth and eighth columns respectively for the three-parameter
functional fit and the two-parameter functional fit, which is defined
by , where
is the quarterly-averaged value of
the sunspot area, the functional fit
value, and N the number of quarters in the cycle. The
three-parameter function usually gives a slightly better fit than the
two-parameter function, and the best fit of the above three kinds is
given by the four-parameter function. These differences are not,
however, considered significant. The more important result is that
sunspot area data can be adequately fit with a relatively simple
function of only two parameters.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: April 28, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |