Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 116 references

Two Types of $1/f$ Range in Solar Wind Turbulence

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The $1/f$ range in solar wind turbulence comes in two distinct forms with different origins.

desk verdict A useful two-type taxonomy of 1/f range in the solar wind, but the 'near-perfect WKB' claim rests on migrating hand-selected bands and needs error bars before it can carry weight. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.17523 v2 pith:IEH65TUI submitted 2025-06-21 astro-ph.SR physics.plasm-phphysics.space-ph

Zesen Huang , Marco Velli , B. D. G. Chandran , Chen Shi , Yuliang Ding , Lorenzo Matteini , Kyung-Eun Choi This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRphysics.plasm-phphysics.space-ph
keywords 1/fnoisesolarwindturbulenceAlfvénicWKBtheorymagneticpowerspectrumautocorrelationfunctioncycleheliosphere
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that the $1/f$ range in the solar wind's magnetic fluctuation spectrum is not a single phenomenon but two. It distinguishes a fast/Alfvénic-wind type, which forms dynamically near the Alfvén surface and then migrates to lower frequencies as the wind expands, from a slow/mixed-wind type, which resembles classical flicker noise and varies with the solar cycle. For the fast type, the paper reports that the frequency-averaged fluctuation amplitude falls with heliocentric distance essentially as the WKB prediction $\delta B^2 \propto R^{-3}$, while the $1/f$ band slides toward lower frequencies at a rate near $R^{-1}$ without changing its width. For the slow/mixed type, it reports stronger spectral power at solar maximum and a $1/f$ band confined within one solar-wind sector, and it links the $1/f$ range to the decline of the magnetic-field autocorrelation function for both types. If this two-type picture is right, no single mechanism can explain all $1/f$ ranges in the solar wind, and the long-standing debate about its origin must be split in two.

What carries the argument

The central object is the rectified trace magnetic power spectral density $P(f)\cdot f$, which represents fluctuation energy per logarithmic frequency because $P(f)\,df=P(f)\,f\,d\ln f$; the paper uses it to identify the $1/f$ band as a plateau of evenly distributed energy and to define a representative amplitude for each stream. The main physical mechanism tested is WKB wave-action conservation for outward-propagating Alfvén waves in an expanding flux tube, which under conserved mass flux, $U\gg V_A$, and spherical expansion gives $\delta B^2\propto R^{-3}$. The third piece is the averaged autocorrelation function of the magnetic field vector, $R(dt)=\langle \mathbf{B}(t)\cdot\mathbf{B}(t+dt)/(|\mathbf{B}(t)||\mathbf{B}(t+dt)|)\rangle_t$, which ties the $1/f$ range to the progressive randomization of the background field and to Carrington-rotation sector structure.

What would settle it

Re-analyze the same intervals with an objective algorithm that defines the $1/f$ band (for example, the widest frequency interval whose smoothed $P(f)\cdot f$ is approximately flat) and recompute the amplitude fall and band-center migration. If the averaged amplitude no longer follows $\delta B^2\propto R^{-3}$, or the band no longer migrates near $R^{-1}$ while keeping its width, the paper's quantitative support for a geometric, WKB-like evolution collapses. A second decisive check would be high-cadence measurements of slow/mixed wind near the Alfvén surface showing a well-formed $1/f$ range, which would contradict the claim that the slow type is strictly source noise.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is that the $1/f$ range in solar wind turbulence comes in two distinct types with different physical origins. The fast/Alfvénic type is found in fast and Alfvénic streams from roughly 0.1 AU to 1 AU and beyond: near the Alfvén surface the $1/f$ range is absent above $10^{-4}$ Hz, it forms quickly, and it then migrates to lower frequencies while the frequency-averaged amplitude follows the WKB scaling $\delta B^2\propto R^{-3}$. The slow/mixed type sits at much lower frequencies, about $10^{-5}$ Hz and below at 1 AU, is stronger during solar maxima, resembles uncorrelated noise, and appears confined within a single solar-wind sector. The paper also reports that the autocorrelation of the full magnetic field vector declines across the $1/f$ range for both types, and that mixed-wind data show resonance peaks at harmonics of the Carrington rotation, including unexpected higher harmonics and zeros at specific time lags where the field polarity becomes completely random.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the hand-selected $1/f$ bands at different heliocentric distances measure the same kind of wave amplitude, even though the bands sit at different frequencies where the conservation law used for the $\delta B^2\propto R^{-3}$ prediction does not strictly apply; the paper itself notes this violates the assumptions of that law.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the fast type is intrinsic to Alfvénic turbulence, models of the $1/f$ range must reproduce its rapid formation just outside the Alfvén surface and its coherent downward migration at roughly $R^{-1}$.
  • If the slow/mixed type is flicker noise, the low-frequency $1/f$ at 1 AU should be viewed as a source-modulated signal rather than as the energy reservoir that feeds the inertial-range cascade.
  • Radial-evolution comparisons must separate the two types, since fast-wind and mixed-wind $1/f$ amplitudes at the same distance reflect different physical processes.
  • The autocorrelation result implies the $1/f$ band is bounded by decorrelation of the magnetic field, so its low-frequency extent in mixed wind is set by the size and stability of a single solar-wind sector.
  • The solar-cycle dependence of the slow/mixed type means the long OMNI record can be used as a diagnostic of solar-source conditions, not just of interplanetary turbulence.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • One testable extension is to search for the slow/mixed-type $1/f$ range in pristine slow wind measured close to the Sun: if it is source-modulated, it should be present even near the Alfvén surface, whereas the fast type should be absent there.
  • The near-$R^{-1}$ migration rate invites a geometric or advective interpretation; a dedicated test would track a single stream with two radially aligned spacecraft and compare the same solar-frame frequency band to see whether the apparent migration reflects wave evolution or convection of expanding structures.
  • The zeros in the autocorrelation function at fractions of the Carrington rotation suggest that the sector structure of the heliosphere could be reconstructed from $R(t)$ alone, giving an independent check on two-sector versus four-sector sector models.
  • Because the WKB claim rests on bands selected by eye at different distances, an automated, repeatable band-finding algorithm applied to the same spectra would show whether the $R^{-3}$ amplitude fall and $R^{-1}$ migration survive without subjective band choice.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes the low-frequency 1/f range in solar wind magnetic field power spectra using data from multiple spacecraft (PSP, Solar Orbiter, Helios, Ulysses, WIND, OMNI-LRO) and over several solar cycles. It proposes a two-type classification: a fast/Alfvénic wind type, which forms near the Alfvén surface, migrates to lower frequencies with heliocentric distance, and has an amplitude that reportedly follows a WKB-like R^-3 scaling; and a slow/mixed wind type, which appears at lower frequencies, varies with the solar cycle, and resembles flicker noise. The paper also relates the 1/f range to the autocorrelation function of the magnetic field vector, reporting a clear decline of correlation across the 1/f range and resonance peaks at harmonics of the Carrington rotation.

Significance. If the classification holds, it provides a useful synthesis of decades of 1/f observations: the two types likely have distinct origins, and the fast type's migration and WKB-like amplitude decay would be a strong constraint on in situ formation mechanisms. The paper's strengths include the multi-spacecraft breadth, the consistent use of P(f)·f to visualize energy distribution, the solar-cycle analysis from OMNI-LRO, and the connection to magnetic field vector autocorrelation. The publicly released PSD code and data references support reproducibility. However, the central quantitative claim of 'near-perfect WKB evolution' is not yet secured because it depends on eye-selected, migrating frequency bands, and the classification is not yet defined operationally.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, Fig. 3, §4.1, Appendix A (Eq. A5–A8)] The claim of 'near-perfect WKB evolution' is not quantitatively established. The WKB prediction δB^2 ∝ R^-3 applies at a fixed solar-frame frequency ω0, as shown in Appendix A, but the measured amplitudes are band averages within eye-selected 1/f ranges that migrate to lower frequencies with R. The authors themselves state in Section 4.1 that 'the corresponding frequencies for each of the intervals vary significantly as R increases, violating the WKB assumptions.' Because the band selection is not independent of the measured quantity, the R^-3 scaling could be an artifact of the selection procedure. The fit in Figure 3 has only 7 points, panel (a) is treated as a peak value rather than a band average, and no uncertainties are given for the fitted exponents a=3.12 and b=3.76. To support the claim, please demonstrate robustness to band-edge choices, compute amplitudes at fixed solar-frame frequencies where possible, and provide uncertainties or bootstrap estimates for the power-law exponents.
  2. [§3.2, Table 1] The migration rate estimate R^{-(b-a)/(α-1)} is not accompanied by uncertainties on a, b, or α, and Table 1 reports spectral slopes without error bars or goodness-of-fit. Without these, the quoted range R^{-0.95} to R^{-1.26} has no demonstrated confidence interval, and the comparison with the R^{-1.52} rate from Helios measurements is not quantitative. Please provide fit uncertainties and propagate them to the migration-rate estimate, or state explicitly that the quoted range is illustrative rather than a measured constraint.
  3. [§3.1 (classification)] The two-type classification is based on visual inspection of representative spectra without an operational definition. As written, a reader cannot determine, from quantitative criteria, whether a given new spectrum belongs to the fast/Alfvénic type or the slow/mixed type. Please define the classification criterion (e.g., frequency of the 1/f range relative to an expected heliospheric-distance trend, Alfvénicity/cross-helicity threshold, or normalized amplitude) and demonstrate that the ten examples are not simply two ends of a continuum. This is load-bearing because the paper's central claim is the existence of two distinct types.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.1 bullet list vs. Fig. 2 caption] The bullet list labels for (b) and (c) are inconsistent with the Figure 2 caption: the text describes (b) as 'Pristine Alfvénic fast wind from outbound section of PSP E19' while the caption lists (b) as 'Alfvénic wind from ± 5 days of E19 perihelion' and (c) as 'Fast wind from outbound of E19'. Please reconcile.
  2. [Various] There are several typographical errors: 'maesurements' in Section 3.3, 'the humanity beings' in Section 5, 'the errorbars shows' in the Figure 2 caption, and 'Fast-Fourier Transformation' in Section 2. Please correct these.
  3. [References] The bibliography entry for Velli et al. (1989) has the incomplete DOI 'doi: chan'; please correct it to the full DOI.
  4. [§3.4, Fig. 5] The interpretation of the autocorrelation zeros and resonance peaks would be strengthened by a significance assessment, for example by comparing with a null model based on phase-randomized or sector-structured magnetic fields. This is not central to the two-type claim but would increase confidence in the reported 'unexpected resonance peaks.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the two-type classification is a data-driven taxonomy and the WKB comparison is an external benchmark applied to measured band amplitudes, not a fitted input or self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are observational. The two-type 1/f classification is a grouping of measured spectra (Figure 2), not a derivation from the claims. The WKB prediction δB^2 ∝ R^-3 is derived in Appendix A from external theory (wave-action conservation, mass-flux conservation, spherical expansion) and then compared to measured P(f)·f values in Figure 3; no parameter is fitted to force the exponent. The paper explicitly concedes in Section 4.1 that the 1/f-band frequencies migrate with R and hence 'violat[e] the WKB assumptions,' so the near-perfect WKB match is a stated empirical comparison made under acknowledged caveats, not a conclusion that reduces to its definition. The self-citations (Huang et al. 2023, 2024) supply the previously published observation of the absent 1/f range near the Alfvén surface and the P(f)·f visualization method; the latter is also attributed to Matthaeus & Goldstein (1986), and neither citation is used to forbid alternatives or to define the main result. The migration-rate estimate is a derived geometric consistency relation from the measured radial exponents, not a renamed input. No equation is constructed so that the output equals the input by definition.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the WKB transport model (Appendix A), on the spacecraft-frame frequency interpretation, and on the hand-selected 1/f bands. Free parameters are the radial exponents and spectral slopes fitted to the selected bands; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Radial power-law exponent a for inertial-range amplitude = 3.12
    Fitted to the squares in Figure 3 (P(f)*f at f = 10^-1.5 Hz vs R), used to estimate migration rate. No error bar given.
  • Radial power-law exponent b for 1/f-range amplitude = 3.76
    Fitted to the circles in Figure 3 (averaged P(f)*f within the 1/f band vs R), used to estimate migration rate. No error bar given.
  • Inertial-range spectral slope alpha per dataset = Table 1: -1.34 to -1.83
    Fitted to each PSD near 10^-1.5 Hz; used to convert the inter-range gap to a migration rate. Uncertainties not reported.
  • 1/f-range boundaries (vertical bars in Fig. 2) = various, chosen by eye
    The frequency range identified as the 1/f plateau for each interval; the classification and all downstream amplitude/migration estimates depend on these hand-selected boundaries.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Constant mass flux rho*U*A = const and spherical expansion of the flux tube
    Invoked in Appendix A (Eq. A6) to derive the WKB prediction deltaB^2 proportional to R^-3.
  • domain assumption Far from the Alfven surface, U >> V_A, so the wave is advected and WKB applies
    Used in Appendix A and Section 4.1 to justify WKB; the paper notes the measured frequencies vary, which technically violates the fixed-frequency requirement.
  • domain assumption Measured spacecraft-frame frequency near the Sun equals the coronal launch frequency (quasi-static PSP frame)
    Invoked in Section 4.1, relying on Huang et al. (2024), to interpret the low-frequency spectrum near PSP perihelion as the launch spectrum.
  • domain assumption Taylor hypothesis converts temporal frequency to spatial wavenumber at 1 AU and beyond
    Invoked in Section 4.1 to discuss lengthening of spatial structures as a possible cause of 1/f migration.
  • ad hoc to paper The eye-identified 1/f ranges in Figure 2 correctly delineate the energy-containing plateau
    The entire two-type classification and amplitude measurements rest on these subjective band choices; no objective criterion is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two Types of $1/f$ Range in Solar Wind Turbulence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IEH65TUI

@misc{pith2026250617523,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two Types of $1/f$ Range in Solar Wind Turbulence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IEH65TUI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.17523}
}
abstract

The $1/f$ noise is a ubiquitous phenomenon in natural systems. Since the advent of space exploration, the $1/f$ range has been consistently observed in \textit{in situ} solar wind measurements throughout the heliosphere, sparking decades of debate regarding its origin. Recent Parker Solar Probe (PSP) observations near the Alfv\'en surface have revealed a systematic absence of the $1/f$ range in pristine solar wind, providing a unique opportunity to investigate its origin in solar wind turbulence. Despite numerous observations of the $1/f$ range at varying frequencies, no study has systematically examined its properties across different solar wind conditions. Here, we identify two distinct types of $1/f$ ranges in solar wind turbulence: the fast/Alfv\'enic wind type and the slow/mixed wind type. The fast/Alfv\'enic type appears to be an intrinsic feature of Alfv\'enic turbulence, while the slow/mixed type resembles classical flicker noise. For the fast/Alfv\'enic type, we find a near-perfect WKB evolution of the frequency-averaged fluctuation amplitude and an intriguing migration pattern in frequency space. For the slow/mixed type, we examine the solar cycle dependence of the $1/f$ noise using the OMNI-LRO dataset spanning solar cycles 22 to 25. We also analyze the autocorrelation function of the magnetic field vectors and identify a clear relationship between the $1/f$ range and the decline in correlation, as well as unexpected resonance peaks in the autocorrelation function.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.17523 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example interval from PSP E19 perihelion. (a) Trajectory of PSP in Carrington corotating frame. Black dots are plotted every eight hours. Green dot indicates the entering direction of the spacecraft. The interval is highlighted with the cyan bar. The radial dotted lines are plotted every 5 degree longitude. The dashed circles are plotted every 10 R⊙. (b) Trace magnetic PSD of the interval. (c) R-T-N components and m… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of 1/f range in rectified trace magnetic PSD of solar wind turbulence. (a) Pristine Alfv´enic (fast) wind from perihelion of PSP E19; (b) Alfv´enic wind from ± 5 days of E19 perihelion; (c) Fast wind from outbound of E19; (d) Helios fast wind; (e) Solar Orbiter fast wind; (f) WIND fast wind; (g) Ulysses polar fast wind; (h) Helios mixed solar wind; (i) OMNI-LRO mixed solar wind; (j) WIND slow wind. The vert… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: Radial dependence of P(f) · f for (a) through (g). The circles are averaged values of P(f) · f within the 1/f range, highlighted with vertical bars in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Time dependence of the OMNI (LRO) trace magnetic PSD over solar cycle 22, 23, 24 and 25. Each line represents two years worth of data. (a) Sunspot number from 1985-01 to 2025-03, where each of the selected time ranges are highlighted with the corresponding colors; (b) …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: 1/f range and magnetic field vector correlation. (a) and (b) are identical to (f) and (g) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

116 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    EE ( bA@)J= e

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    2019, Space Science Reviews, 215, 9, 10.1007/s11214-018-0576-4

    Angelopoulos, V., Cruce, P., Drozdov, A., et al. 2019, Space Science Reviews, 215, 9, 10.1007/s11214-018-0576-4

    doi:10.1007/s11214-018-0576-4 2019

  5. [5]

    1987, Physical Review Letters, 59, 381, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.381

    Bak, P., Tang, C., & Wiesenfeld, K. 1987, Physical Review Letters, 59, 381, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.381

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.59.381 1987

  6. [6]

    D., Badman, S

    Bale, S. D., Badman, S. T., Bonnell, J. W., et al. 2019, Nature, 1, 10.1038/s41586-019-1818-7

    doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1818-7 2019

  7. [7]

    D., Drake, J

    Bale, S. D., Drake, J. F., McManus, M. D., et al. 2023, Nature, 618, 252, 10.1038/s41586-023-05955-3

    doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05955-3 2023

  8. [8]

    J., Forsyth, R

    Balogh, A., Beek, T. J., Forsyth, R. J., et al. 1992, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series (ISSN 0365-0138), vol. 92, no. 2, Jan. 1992, p. 221-236. Research supported by SERC., 92, 221

    1992

Show all 116 references
  1. [9]

    J., McComas, D

    Bame, S. J., McComas, D. J., Barraclough, B. L., et al. 1992, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series (ISSN 0365-0138), vol. 92, no. 2, Jan. 1992, p. 237-265. Research supported by DOE., 92, 237

    1992

  2. [10]

    Bavassano, B., Dobrowolny, M., Fanfoni, G., Mariani, F., & Ness, N. F. 1982, Solar Physics, 78, 373, 10.1007/BF00151617

    1982 doi

  3. [11]

    Belcher, J. W. 1971, Astrophysical Journal, vol. 168, p.509, 10.1086/151105

    1971 doi

  4. [12]

    W., & Davis, L

    Belcher, J. W., & Davis, L. 1971, Journal of Geophysical Research, 76, 3534, 10.1029/JA076i016p03534

    1971 doi

  5. [13]

    2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 626, L37, 10.1086/431649

    Boldyrev, S. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 626, L37, 10.1086/431649

    2005 doi

  6. [14]

    2006, Physical Review Letters, 96, 115002, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.115002

    ---. 2006, Physical Review Letters, 96, 115002, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.115002

    2006 doi

  7. [15]

    2002, Physics of Fluids, 14, 3046, 10.1063/1.1497376

    Bourgoin, M., Mari \'e , L., P \'e tr \'e lis, F., et al. 2002, Physics of Fluids, 14, 3046, 10.1063/1.1497376

    2002 doi

  8. [16]

    A., Mallet, A., Bale, S

    Bowen, T. A., Mallet, A., Bale, S. D., et al. 2020, Phys. Rev. Lett., 125, 025102, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.025102

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    Brophy, J. J. 1969, Journal of Applied Physics, 40, 3551, 10.1063/1.1658236

    1969 doi

  10. [18]

    2013, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 10, 2, 10.12942/lrsp-2013-2

    Bruno, R., & Carbone, V. 2013, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 10, 2, 10.12942/lrsp-2013-2

    2013 doi

  11. [19]

    2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 627, A96, 10.1051/0004-6361/201935841

    Bruno, R., Telloni, D., Sorriso-Valvo, L., et al. 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 627, A96, 10.1051/0004-6361/201935841

    2019 doi

  12. [20]

    Chandran, B. D. G. 2018, Journal of Plasma Physics, 84, 10.1017/S0022377818000016

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    Chandran, B. D. G., & Perez, J. C. 2019, Journal of Plasma Physics, 85, 905850409, 10.1017/S0022377819000540

    2019 doi

  14. [22]

    V., et al

    Chhiber, R., Pecora, F., Usmanov, A. V., et al. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 533, L70, 10.1093/mnrasl/slae051

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    2019, Solar Physics, 294, 44, 10.1007/s11207-019-1433-7

    Choi, K.-E., & Lee, D.-Y. 2019, Solar Physics, 294, 44, 10.1007/s11207-019-1433-7

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    2021, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 126, e2020JA028996, 10.1029/2020JA028996

    D Amicis, R., Perrone, D., Bruno, R., & Velli, M. 2021, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 126, e2020JA028996, 10.1029/2020JA028996

    2021 doi

  17. [25]

    2025, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 693, A243, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451686

    D Amicis, R., Velli, M., Panasenco, O., et al. 2025, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 693, A243, 10.1051/0004-6361/202451686

    2025 doi

  18. [26]

    Davis, N., Chandran, B. D. G., Bowen, T. A., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 950, 154, 10.3847/1538-4357/acd177

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    2023, 68, 10.1360/TB-2022-0674

    Deng, Y., Zhou, G., Dai, S., et al. 2023, 68, 10.1360/TB-2022-0674

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    U., & Neubauer, F

    Denskat, K. U., & Neubauer, F. M. 1982, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 87, 2215, 10.1029/JA087iA04p02215

    1982 doi

  21. [29]

    D., Pouquet, A., Servidio, S., & Matthaeus, W

    Dmitruk, P., Mininni, P. D., Pouquet, A., Servidio, S., & Matthaeus, W. H. 2014, Physical Review E, 90, 043010, 10.1103/PhysRevE.90.043010

    2014 doi

  22. [30]

    Dorseth, M., Bourouaine, S., & Perez, J. C. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 974, L34, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad81f9

    2024 doi

  23. [31]

    F., Agapitov, O., Swisdak, M., et al

    Drake, J. F., Agapitov, O., Swisdak, M., et al. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 650, A2

    2021

  24. [32]

    V., Bale, S

    Dudok de Wit, T., Krasnoselskikh, V. V., Bale, S. D., et al. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 39, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5853

    2020 doi

  25. [33]

    J., Velli, M

    Fox, N. J., Velli, M. C., Bale, S. D., et al. 2016, Space Science Reviews, 204, 7, 10.1007/s11214-015-0211-6

    2016 doi

  26. [34]

    2016, Introduction to Modern Magnetohydrodynamics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 10.1017/CBO9781316665961

    Galtier, S. 2016, Introduction to Modern Magnetohydrodynamics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 10.1017/CBO9781316665961

    2016 doi

  27. [35]

    1995, The Astrophysical Journal, 438, 763, 10.1086/175121

    Goldreich, P., & Sridhar, S. 1995, The Astrophysical Journal, 438, 763, 10.1086/175121

    1995 doi

  28. [36]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357, 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  29. [37]

    1995, Space Science Reviews, 71, 23, 10.1007/BF00751324

    Harten, R., & Clark, K. 1995, Space Science Reviews, 71, 23, 10.1007/BF00751324

    1995 doi

  30. [38]

    1980, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 85, 1311, 10.1029/JA085iA03p01311

    Heinemann, M., & Olbert, S. 1980, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 85, 1311, 10.1029/JA085iA03p01311

    1980 doi

  31. [39]

    Hollweg, J. V. 1978, Solar Physics, 56, 305, 10.1007/BF00152474

    1978 doi

  32. [40]

    2025 a , SWTurbPy , Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.16555026

    huang, z. 2025 a , SWTurbPy , Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.16555026

    2025 doi

  33. [41]

    2025 b , Hampel Filter , Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.16555082

    ---. 2025 b , Hampel Filter , Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.16555082

    2025 doi

  34. [42]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 950, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/acd7f2

    Huang, Z., Sioulas, N., Shi, C., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 950, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/acd7f2

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 977, L12, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad9271

    Huang, Z., Velli, M., Shi, C., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 977, L12, 10.3847/2041-8213/ad9271

    2024 doi

  36. [44]

    S., Svalgaard, L., & Hannah, I

    Hudson, H. S., Svalgaard, L., & Hannah, I. G. 2014, Space Science Reviews, 186, 17, 10.1007/s11214-014-0121-z

    2014 doi

  37. [45]

    Hunter, J. D. 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering, 9, 90, 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    2007 doi

  38. [46]

    Iroshnikov, P. S. 1964, sovast, 7, 566

    1964

  39. [47]

    Johnson, J. B. 1925, Physical Review, 26, 71, 10.1103/PhysRev.26.71

    1925 doi

  40. [48]

    C., Bale, S

    Kasper, J. C., Bale, S. D., Belcher, J. W., et al. 2019, Nature, 576, 228

    2019

  41. [49]

    C., Klein, K

    Kasper, J. C., Klein, K. G., Lichko, E., et al. 2021, Physical Review Letters, 127, 255101, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.255101

    2021 doi

  42. [50]

    H., & Papitashvili, N

    King, J. H., & Papitashvili, N. E. 2005, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 110, 10.1029/2004JA010649

    2005 doi

  43. [51]

    1941, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady, 30, 301

    Kolmogorov, A. 1941, Akademiia Nauk SSSR Doklady, 30, 301

    1941

  44. [52]

    1965, 10.1063/1.1761412

    Kraichnan, R. 1965, 10.1063/1.1761412

    1965 doi

  45. [53]

    Kruparova, O., Krupar, V., Szabo, A., Pulupa, M., & Bale, S. D. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 957, 13, 10.3847/1538-4357/acf572

    2023 doi

  46. [54]

    K., Pitrou, A., & Seibert, S

    Lam, S. K., Pitrou, A., & Seibert, S. 2015, in Proceedings of the Second Workshop on the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure in HPC (Austin Texas: ACM), 1--6, 10.1145/2833157.2833162

    2015

  47. [55]

    Larosa, A., Chen, C. H. K., McIntyre, J. R., Jagarlamudi, V. K., & Sorriso-Valvo, L. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 686, A238, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450030

    2024 doi

  48. [56]

    Larosa, A., Krasnoselskikh, V., Wit, T. D. d., et al. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 650, A3, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039442

    2021 doi

  49. [57]

    Magyar, N., & Doorsselaere, T. V. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 938, 98, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8b81

    2022 doi

  50. [58]

    2019, Il Nuovo Cimento C, 42, 1, 10.1393/ncc/i2019-19016-y

    Matteini, L. 2019, Il Nuovo Cimento C, 42, 1, 10.1393/ncc/i2019-19016-y

    2019 doi

  51. [59]

    S., & Chen, C

    Matteini, L., Stansby, D., Horbury, T. S., & Chen, C. H. K. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 869, L32, 10.3847/2041-8213/aaf573

    2018 doi

  52. [60]

    2024, Physics of Plasmas, 31, 032901, 10.1063/5.0177754

    Matteini, L., Tenerani, A., Landi, S., et al. 2024, Physics of Plasmas, 31, 032901, 10.1063/5.0177754

    2024 doi

  53. [61]

    H., Breech, B., Dmitruk, P., et al

    Matthaeus, W. H., Breech, B., Dmitruk, P., et al. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 657, L121, 10.1086/513075

    2007 doi

  54. [62]

    H., & Goldstein, M

    Matthaeus, W. H., & Goldstein, M. L. 1982, jgr, 87, 10347, 10.1029/JA087iA12p10347

    1982 doi

  55. [63]

    1986, Physical Review Letters, 57, 495, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.495

    ---. 1986, Physical Review Letters, 57, 495, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.495

    1986 doi

  56. [64]

    H., Goldstein, M

    Matthaeus, W. H., Goldstein, M. L., & Smith, C. 1982, Physical Review Letters, 48, 1256, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.48.1256

    1982 doi

  57. [65]

    H., & Lamkin, S

    Matthaeus, W. H., & Lamkin, S. L. 1986, Physics of Fluids, 29, 2513, 10.1063/1.866004

    1986 doi

  58. [66]

    J., Elliott, H

    McComas, D. J., Elliott, H. A., Schwadron, N. A., et al. 2003, Geophysical Research Letters, 30, 10.1029/2003GL017136

    2003 doi

  59. [67]

    R., Chen, C

    McIntyre, J. R., Chen, C. H., & Larosa, A. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 957, 111. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/acf3dd/meta

    2023 doi

  60. [68]

    2002, 1/f noise: a pedagogical review, arXiv, 10.48550/arXiv.physics/0204033

    Milotti, E. 2002, 1/f noise: a pedagogical review, arXiv, 10.48550/arXiv.physics/0204033

    2002 doi arXiv

  61. [69]

    2023, Entropy, 25, 1593, 10.3390/e25121593

    Morikawa, M., & Nakamichi, A. 2023, Entropy, 25, 1593, 10.3390/e25121593

    2023 doi

  62. [70]

    J., Molnar, M., Cranmer, S

    Morton, R. J., Molnar, M., Cranmer, S. R., & Schad, T. A. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 982, 104, 10.3847/1538-4357/adb8df

    2025 doi

  63. [71]

    J., & Soler, R

    Morton, R. J., & Soler, R. 2025, On the origins of coronal Alfv \'e nic waves, arXiv, 10.48550/arXiv.2505.08636

    2025 doi arXiv

  64. [72]

    J., Weberg, M

    Morton, R. J., Weberg, M. J., & McLaughlin, J. A. 2019, Nature Astronomy, 3, 223, 10.1038/s41550-018-0668-9

    2019 doi

  65. [73]

    M \"u ller, D., Cyr, O. C. S., Zouganelis, I., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038467

    2020 doi

  66. [74]

    1996, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 101, 27077, 10.1029/96JA02470

    Mursula, K., & Zieger, B. 1996, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 101, 27077, 10.1029/96JA02470

    1996 doi

  67. [75]

    Nakagawa, Y., & Levine, R. H. 1974, The Astrophysical Journal, 190, 441, 10.1086/152896

    1974 doi

  68. [76]

    2025, The Next Decade of Discovery in Solar and Space Physics : Exploring and Safeguarding Humanity 's Home in Space (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press), 10.17226/27938

    National Academies of Sciences, and Medicine, E. 2025, The Next Decade of Discovery in Solar and Space Physics : Exploring and Safeguarding Humanity 's Home in Space (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press), 10.17226/27938

    2025 doi

  69. [77]

    T., Buratti, B

    Pappalardo, R. T., Buratti, B. J., Korth, H., et al. 2024, Space Science Reviews, 220, 40, 10.1007/s11214-024-01070-5

    2024 doi

  70. [78]

    C., Bourouaine, S., Chen, C

    Perez, J. C., Bourouaine, S., Chen, C. H. K., & Raouafi, N. E. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 650, A22, 10.1051/0004-6361/202039879

    2021 doi

  71. [79]

    D., et al

    Perrone, D., D Amicis, R., Marco, R. D., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 633, A166, 10.1051/0004-6361/201937064

    2020 doi

  72. [80]

    Pope, S. B. 2015, Turbulent flows, 1st edn. (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

    2015

  73. [81]

    1981, 164, 43

    Porsche, H. 1981, 164, 43. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ESASP.164...43P

    1981

  74. [82]

    A., Roy, S., Matthaeus, W

    Pradata, R. A., Roy, S., Matthaeus, W. H., et al. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 984, L23, 10.3847/2041-8213/adc9b2

    2025 doi

  75. [83]

    Press, W. H. 1978, Comments on Astrophysics, 7, 103. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978ComAp...7..103P

    1978

  76. [84]

    E., Matteini, L., Squire, J., et al

    Raouafi, N. E., Matteini, L., Squire, J., et al. 2023, Space Science Reviews, 219, 8, 10.1007/s11214-023-00952-4

    2023 doi

  77. [85]

    1918, Annalen der Physik, 362, 541, 10.1002/andp.19183622304

    Schottky, W. 1918, Annalen der Physik, 362, 541, 10.1002/andp.19183622304

    1918 doi

  78. [86]

    1922, Annalen der Physik, 373, 157, 10.1002/andp.19223731007

    ---. 1922, Annalen der Physik, 373, 157, 10.1002/andp.19223731007

    1922 doi

  79. [87]

    Shaikh, Z. I. 2024, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 530, 3005, 10.1093/mnras/stae897

    2024 doi

  80. [88]

    Shi, C., Velli, M., Pucci, F., Tenerani, A., & Innocenti, M. E. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 902, 142, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb6fa

    2020 doi

  81. [89]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 934, 152, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c11

    Shi, C., Panasenco, O., Velli, M., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 934, 152, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c11

    2022 doi

  82. [90]

    2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 934, 143, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7aa2

    Sioulas, N., Huang, Z., Velli, M., et al. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 934, 143, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7aa2

    2022 doi

  83. [91]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 951, 141

    Sioulas, N., Velli, M., Huang, Z., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 951, 141. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/acc658/meta

    2023 doi

  84. [92]

    A., Hickey, B

    Taft, B. A., Hickey, B. M., Wunsch, C., & Baker, D. J. 1974, Deep Sea Research and Oceanographic Abstracts, 21, 403, 10.1016/0011-7471(74)90091-6

    1974 doi

  85. [93]

    Taylor, G. I. 1938, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 164, 476, 10.1098/rspa.1938.0032

    1938

  86. [94]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 919, L31, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2606

    Tenerani, A., Sioulas, N., Matteini, L., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 919, L31, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2606

    2021 doi

  87. [95]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 974, 109, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6cd4

    Terres, M., & Li, G. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 974, 109, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad6cd4

    2024 doi

  88. [96]

    1993, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 98, 1257, 10.1029/92JA01947

    Tu, C.-Y., & Marsch, E. 1993, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 98, 1257, 10.1029/92JA01947

    1993 doi

  89. [97]

    Y., & Marsch, E

    Tu, C. Y., & Marsch, E. 1995, Space Science Reviews, 73, 1, 10.1007/BF00748891

    1995 doi

  90. [98]

    Tu, C.-Y., Marsch, E., & Thieme, K. M. 1989, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 94, 11739, 10.1029/JA094iA09p11739

    1989 doi

  91. [99]

    1984, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 89, 9695, 10.1029/JA089iA11p09695

    Tu, C.-Y., Pu, Z.-Y., & Wei, F.-S. 1984, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 89, 9695, 10.1029/JA089iA11p09695

    1984 doi

  92. [100]

    1993, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 270, 304

    Velli, M. 1993, Astronomy and Astrophysics, 270, 304. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993A&A...270..304V

    1993

  93. [101]

    1989, Physical Review Letters, 63, 1807, chan

    Velli, M., Grappin, R., & Mangeney, A. 1989, Physical Review Letters, 63, 1807, chan

    1989

  94. [102]

    1991, Geophysical & Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics, 62, 101, 10.1080/03091929108229128

    ---. 1991, Geophysical & Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics, 62, 101, 10.1080/03091929108229128

    1991 doi

  95. [103]

    2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 750, L33, 10.1088/2041-8205/750/2/L33

    Verdini, A., Grappin, R., Pinto, R., & Velli, M. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 750, L33, 10.1088/2041-8205/750/2/L33

    2012 doi

  96. [104]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature Methods, 17, 261, 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  97. [105]

    F., & Clarke, J

    Voss, R. F., & Clarke, J. 1975, Nature, 258, 317, 10.1038/258317a0

    1975 doi

  98. [106]

    H., Chhiber, R., et al

    Wang, J., Matthaeus, W. H., Chhiber, R., et al. 2024, \ 1/f\ Noise in the Heliosphere : A Target for PUNCH Science , arXiv, 10.48550/arXiv.2409.02255

    2024 doi arXiv

  99. [107]

    2024, Solar Physics, 299, 54, 10.1007/s11207-024-02300-3

    Wang, Y.-M. 2024, Solar Physics, 299, 54, 10.1007/s11207-024-02300-3

    2024 doi

  100. [108]

    P., Marsden, R

    Wenzel, K. P., Marsden, R. G., Page, D. E., & Smith, E. J. 1992, Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 92, 207. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992A&AS...92..207W

    1992

  101. [109]

    Whang, Y. C. 1973, Journal of Geophysical Research, 78, 7221, 10.1029/JA078i031p07221

    1973 doi

  102. [110]

    2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 984, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/adcd67

    Wu, H., Huang, S., Yang, L., He, J., & Yuan, Z. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal, 984, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/adcd67

    2025 doi

  103. [111]

    2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 904, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/abc5b6

    Wu, H., Tu, C., Wang, X., He, J., & Yang, L. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 904, L8, 10.3847/2041-8213/abc5b6

    2020 doi

  104. [112]

    2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 912, 84, 10.3847/1538-4357/abf099

    Wu, H., Tu, C., Wang, X., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 912, 84, 10.3847/1538-4357/abf099

    2021 doi

  105. [113]

    P., Nakanotani, M., Zhao, L.-L., Adhikari, L., & Kasper, J

    Zank, G. P., Nakanotani, M., Zhao, L.-L., Adhikari, L., & Kasper, J. 2020 a , The Astrophysical Journal, 903, 1, 10.3847/1538-4357/abb828

    2020 doi

  106. [114]

    P., Nakanotani, M., Zhao, L.-L., Adhikari, L., & Telloni, D

    Zank, G. P., Nakanotani, M., Zhao, L.-L., Adhikari, L., & Telloni, D. 2020 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 900, 115, 10.3847/1538-4357/abad30

    2020 doi

  107. [115]

    P., Opher, M., et al

    Zhao, L.-L., Zank, G. P., Opher, M., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 973, 26, 10.3847/1538-4357/ad64c8

    2024 doi

  108. [116]

    P., Zhao, L., & Silwal, A

    Zhu, X., Zank, G. P., Zhao, L., & Silwal, A. 2025, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 978, L34, 10.3847/2041-8213/ada354

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.