Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2606.19539

Review of Machine Learning Models for Solar Energetic Particle Prediction

Spiridon Kasapis·Pouya Hosseinzadeh·Kathryn Whitman·Ricky Egeland·Manolis Georgoulis·Angelos Vourlidas·Athanasios Papaioannou·Eleni Lavasa·Anastasios Anastasiadis·Giorgos Giannopoulos·Andres Munoz-Jaramillo·Bala Poduval·Irina N. Kitiashvili·Alexander G. Kosovichev·Viacheslav Sadykov·Soukaina Filali Boubrahimi·Tate T. Hutchins·Hameedullah A. Farooki·Manuel E. Cuesta·Leng Y. Khoo·Sungmin Pak·Robert Czarnota·Jamie S. Rankin·Jamey Szalay·Mitchell M. Shen·Georgios Livadiotis·Zigong Xu·David J. McComas·Nikolaos Sarlis·Dionissios Hristopulos·Arik Posner·Alec J. Engell·Mohammed AbuBakr Ali·Ali G. A. Abdelkawy·Abdelrazek M. K. Shaltout·M. M. Beheary·Christina O. Lee·Sigiava Aminalragia-Giamini·Constantinos Papadimitriou·Ingmar Sandberg·Savvas Raptis·Shah Muhammad Hamdi·Monica Laurenza·Mirko Stumpo·Sumanth A. Rotti·India Jackson·Aatiya Ali·Atilim Gunes Baydin·Nathan Schwadron·Subhamoy Chatterjee·Maher A. Dayeh·Gelu M. Nita·Patrick M. O'Keefe·Chun Jie Chong·Paul Kosovich·Russell D. Marroquin·Berkay Aydin·Petrus C. Martens·Lulu Zhao·Yang Chen·Yian Yu·Monica G. Bobra·Ward Manchester·Tamas Gombosi·Ming Zhang·Jesse Torres·Philip K. Chan·Mohamed Nedal·Kamen Kozarev·Peijin Zhang·Kimberly Moreland·Hazel M. Bain·Samuel Hart·Michael J. Starkey·Alan G. Ling·Simone Benella
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Solar energetic particle (SEP) events have attracted increasing attention due to their significant radiation hazards for aviation, spacecraft electronics, and human missions beyond Earth's magnetosphere. From a scientific perspective, SEP events are intriguing because they arise from a set of physical processes extending from the solar surface and corona through the heliosphere, offering insight into particle acceleration and transport mechanisms that are widely applicable across astrophysics. Therefore, advancing our ability to understand and predict SEP events is essential both for deepening our knowledge of such mechanisms and for safeguarding space technologies and exploration. Traditionally, researchers have modeled SEPs using physics-based simulations and empirical methods. More recently, machine learning (ML) has emerged as a new tool for understanding and predicting SEP events. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the currently available ML models for SEP prediction, identify the datasets used for training, compare their architectures, inputs, and outputs, and, based on these insights, outline good practices and recommendations for future research.

Explore related subjects

astro-ph.SRcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Spiridon Kasapis, Pouya Hosseinzadeh, Kathryn Whitman, Ricky Egeland, Manolis Georgoulis, Angelos Vourlidas, Athanasios Papaioannou, Eleni Lavasa, Anastasios Anastasiadis, Giorgos Giannopoulos, Andres Munoz-Jaramillo, Bala Poduval, Irina N. Kitiashvili, Alexander G. Kosovichev, Viacheslav Sadykov, Soukaina Filali Boubrahimi, Tate T. Hutchins, Hameedullah A. Farooki, Manuel E. Cuesta, Leng Y. Khoo, Sungmin Pak, Robert Czarnota, Jamie S. Rankin, Jamey Szalay, Mitchell M. Shen, Georgios Livadiotis, Zigong Xu, David J. McComas, Nikolaos Sarlis, Dionissios Hristopulos, Arik Posner, Alec J. Engell, Mohammed AbuBakr Ali, Ali G. A. Abdelkawy, Abdelrazek M. K. Shaltout, M. M. Beheary, Christina O. Lee, Sigiava Aminalragia-Giamini, Constantinos Papadimitriou, Ingmar Sandberg, Savvas Raptis, Shah Muhammad Hamdi, Monica Laurenza, Mirko Stumpo, Sumanth A. Rotti, India Jackson, Aatiya Ali, Atilim Gunes Baydin, Nathan Schwadron, Subhamoy Chatterjee, Maher A. Dayeh, Gelu M. Nita, Patrick M. O'Keefe, Chun Jie Chong, Paul Kosovich, Russell D. Marroquin, Berkay Aydin, Petrus C. Martens, Lulu Zhao, Yang Chen, Yian Yu, Monica G. Bobra, Ward Manchester, Tamas Gombosi, Ming Zhang, Jesse Torres, Philip K. Chan, Mohamed Nedal, Kamen Kozarev, Peijin Zhang, Kimberly Moreland, Hazel M. Bain, Samuel Hart, Michael J. Starkey, Alan G. Ling, Simone Benella. 2026-06-17. Review of Machine Learning Models for Solar Energetic Particle Prediction. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.19539

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Eclipse Properties and Superhump Evolution in the SU UMa-Type Dwarf Nova Z Cha

The advent of large-scale time-domain surveys provides both opportunities and challenges for understanding accretion disk evolution in cataclysmic variables (CVs). Using high-cadence photometry from the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), we investigate the eclipsing SU UMa-type dwarf nova Z Cha. Leveraging eclipses as a natural probe, we examine the evolution of the accretion disk through variations in eclipse depth, O--C of eclipse minima, and positive superhump (PSH) amplitude. During superoutbursts, all three quantities exhibit quasi-periodic modulations with a common period of $\sim$2 days, consistent with the precession period of an eccentric disk. We interpret these correlated variations as evidence of an eccentric, precessing disk: O--C traces the periodic shift of the system's brightness center, while eclipse depth and PSH amplitude vary with the orientation of the disk bulge relative to the line of sight. In quiescence (Sectors 13 and 93), PSHs with periods of $\sim$0.0762 days show linearly decreasing amplitudes and periods, indicating gradual shrinkage of the eccentric disk and a slowing precession. Remarkably, a coherent signal with a period of $\sim$0.0729~days ($\epsilon^{-}\approx-0.02$) appears in the same quiescent intervals. This signal may represent negative superhumps (NSHs) coexisting with PSHs, although an orbital sideband of the PSH cannot presently be excluded with the available data. If confirmed as NSHs, their coexistence with PSHs would challenge the classical tilted-disk model, and could be explained by retrograde apsidal precession of an eccentric disk, where the inner disk precesses retrogradely (NSHs) and the outer disk progradely (PSHs); this interpretation remains to be tested by further observations.

astro-ph.SR↗
arXiv2026

Classical Nova V1405 Cas Had $M_{\rm ejecta}$$>$$M_{\rm accreted}$ and so is Unlikely to be a Type Ia Supernova Progenitor

Nova 2021 Cassiopeia (V1405 Cas) was an ordinary J(175) neon nova with the white dwarf mass estimated to be $M_{\rm WD}$=0.60$\pm$0.10 $M_{\odot}$. I found an orbital period of $P$=0.1884 days, and have tracked 20 times of photometric minima from 2013--2025. I measure that $P$ increased from before to after the eruption with $P_{\rm pre}$=0.1883919$\pm$0.0000018 days and $P_{\rm post}$=0.1884043$\pm$0.0000018 days, for $\Delta P$/$P$=66$_{-18}^{+21}$ parts-per-million. With correction for the angular momentum loss by the binary during the eruption, I derive that the nova ejected $M_{\rm ejecta}$=7.5$\times$10$^{-4}$ $M_{\odot}$, with an extreme range of (2.9--40)$\times$10$^{-4}$ $M_{\odot}$. The mass accreted during the previous eruption cycle comes from the trigger mass, and is $M_{\rm accreted}$=(1.6$\pm$0.4)$\times$10$^{-4}$ $M_{\odot}$. V1405 Cas provides counterexamples against five claims about CV evolution that have dominated since the 1980s. First, V1405 Cas has positive $\dot{P}$, and this is contrary to the Magnetic Braking Model. Second, the $\Delta P$ is 20$\times$ too small to allow the system to fade into a hibernation state. Third, $M_{\rm WD}$ is decreasing over time, as shown by $M_{\rm ejecta}$$>$$M_{\rm accreted}$ and by being a neon nova. Fourth, V1405 Cas is not a Type Ia supernova progenitor, for the same reasons. Fifth, the orbital period of V1405 Cas increased by $+$75 ppm from 2013--2025, as a counterexample to the pervasive idea that cataclysmic variables are universally declining in period from evolution. V1405 Cas is the latest of recent measures of $\Delta P$ and $\dot{P}$ for 52 cataclysmic variables and 25 X-ray binaries that have together refuted all five claims.

astro-ph.SR↗
arXiv2026

A prolonged plateau-to-tail transition in the Type II supernova SN2025abyc

We present optical photometric and spectroscopic observations of the Type II supernova SN2025abyc. During the optically thick phase between approximately 10 and 70 d after explosion, its light curves show strongly wavelength-dependent decline rates of approximately 2.7, 2.1, 0.9, and 0.8 mag/100d in the g, c, r, and o bands, respectively. At approximately 70 d, the light curves begin to depart from their nearly linear plateau evolution and gradually transition toward the radioactive tail. A Fermi-Dirac fit to the well-sampled ATLAS o-band light curve yields a transition midpoint of t_PT ~ 100.5d. The interval between the end of the linear plateau and this transition midpoint is approximately 30 d, indicating a prolonged plateau-to-tail transition. This timescale is comparable to those measured for SN2013by, SN2013ej, and SN2014G. Spectroscopically, at +13 d post-explosion, the Halpha profile appears weak and broad, whereas Hbeta and Hgamma display clear P-Cygni profiles. This morphology can be explained by the normal early spectroscopic evolution of SNe II, although partial filling of the Halpha absorption trough by emission associated with circumstellar interaction cannot be excluded. SN2025abyc otherwise follows the general photospheric velocity evolution of SNe II, while remaining toward the high-velocity side of the comparison distribution in Halpha, Hbeta, and FeII. Exploratory light-curve modelling suggests a synthesized Ni mass of approximately 0.03-0.04 solar mass. We suggest that the extended circumstellar environment, Ni distribution, and hydrogen-envelope structure could all play a role in shaping the observed light-curve evolution, particularly the prolonged plateau-to-tail transition.

astro-ph.SR↗