for understanding the ionization states of ACRs and their potential interactions as they traverse the upper atmosphere.
Overall, Figures 1, 2, and 3 depict the variation in the intensity of anomalous cosmic ray spectra with altitude, particularly between 50 km and 40 km in Earth ' s atmosphere. The difference in intensity between these two altitudes is clearly visible, with higher intensity observed at 50 km compared to 40 km. This variation in spectra provides significant insights into the dynamics of Earth ' s upper atmosphere and the interactions between cosmic rays and atmospheric particles at different altitudes.
5. CONCLUSION
In the present study, we apply the computer programs CORSIMA [ 16 ] and CORIMIA [ 1 ]— designed for multiply charged particles, which are frequently observed [ 4 ], [ 9 ], [ 11 ] [, 5 ], [ 12 ]— to determine the effect of anomalous cosmic rays( ACRs) on the polar caps of the Earth’ s ionosphere. We utilized experimental satellite data [ 5 ], [ 12 ], [ 7 ] as input spectra for our calculations. Ionization spectra were obtained for the main ACR species( protons, helium, and oxygen) in high-latitude regions, specifically for altitudes between 40 and 50 km. Characteristic variations in the spectra were observed in these regions due to the atmospheric cut-off effect. The impact of ACRs is primarily limited to the polar cap regions above geomagnetic latitude λ m = 62 ∘ −63 ∘. The united model, CORIMIA-CORSIMA, is an extension of previous models [ 16 ], [ 1 ]. This combined model can be applied to complex studies investigating the relationship between astroparticles, space weather, and the Earth’ s environment [ 14 ], [ 6 ], [ 8 ], with a particular focus on applications in ionospheric physics.
6. REFERENCES
1. Asenovski S. Operational Model CORIMIA( COsmic Ray Ionization Model for Ionosphere and Atmosphere), PhD Thesis, Sofia, IKIT BAN, 2013, 160 p.
2. Bojilova, R., Mukhtarov, P. Response of total electron content to the three G4 – severe geomagnetic storms in January 2005 associated with cosmic ray events GLE 68 and GLE 69. C. R Acad. Bulg. Sci., 2019, 72( 9), 1244-1250.
3. Bojilova, R., Mukhtarov, P. Response of the electron density profiles to geomagnetic d isturbances in January 2005. Studia Geophys. Geod., 2019, 63( 3), 436-454. 4. Cummings A. C., E. C. Stone, W. R. Webber, Evidence that the anomalous component is singly ionized. Astrophys. J.( Letters), 1984, 287, 99-103. 5. Cummings, A. C., Stone, E. C., Composition of Anomalous Cosmic Rays, Space Sci. Rev.,
2007, 130( 1 – 4), 389 – 399. Doi: 10.1007 / s11214-007-9161-y. 6. Eroshenko E., Relationships between neutron fluxes and rain flows, Adv. Space Res., 2010,
46( 1), 637 – 641, https:// doi. org / 10.1016 / j. asr. 2010.04.016
7. Giacalone, J., Fahr, H., Fichtner, H., Florinski, V., Heber, B. et al. Anomalous cosmic rays and heliospheric energetic particles, Space Sci. Rev., 2022, 218( 4), article id. 22, Doi: 10.1007 / s11214-022-00890-7
8. Gronoff G., C. Mertens, J. Lilensten, L. Desorgher, E. Fl ückiger et al. Ionization processes in the atmosphere of Titan. III – Ionization by high-Zcosmic rays, Astron. & Astrophys., 2011, 529( 5), A143, https:// doi. org / 10.1051 / 0004-6361 / 201015675
9. Jokipi J. R. Theory of Multiply Charged Anomalous Cosmic Rays. Astrophys. J., 1996, 466: L47 – L50
10. Kilifarska, N., Bojilova, R. Geomagnetic focusing of cosmic rays in the lower atmosphere – evidence and mechanism. C. R Acad. Bulg. Sci., 2019, 72( 3), 365 – 374.
11. Mewaldt R. A. Implications of multiply-charged anomalous cosmic rays, AIP Conference Proceedings, 2006, 858, 92 – 97. https:// doi. org / 10.1063 / 1.2359311
12. Mewaldt R. A., R. S. Selesnick, J. R. Cummings, E. C. Stone, Evidence for Multiply Charged Anomalous Cosmic Rays. The Astrophys. J., 1996, 466, L43 – L46.
13.[ Mishev A. Normalized ionization yield function for various nuclei obtainedwith full Monte Carlo simulations, Adv. Space Res., 2011, 48, 19 – 24
14. Tsagouri I., A. Belehaki, Progress in space weather modeling in anoperational
294