Solar Cycle Prediction: Challenges, Progress, and Future Perspectives
Bidya Binay Karak

TL;DR
This paper reviews the challenges and progress in solar cycle prediction, analyzing past methods and emphasizing the importance of physical models like the polar field and dynamo models for future accuracy.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive analysis of various prediction methods, highlights their limitations, and discusses future directions for improving solar cycle forecasts.
Findings
Most prediction methods failed to accurately predict cycle peaks.
ML models showed limited success in solar cycle prediction.
Physically supported approaches like polar field predictions are promising but have timing limitations.
Abstract
Reliable prediction of the solar cycle is a formidable challenge, yet it is increasingly vital in our technology-dependent society as solar activity drives space weather. Various methods, including precursors, nonlinear curve fitting and extrapolation, statistical and Machine Learning (ML) models, and dynamo and surface flux transport (SFT) models, were implemented to predict past cycles. Analysing about 100 predictions for Solar Cycle 24 and over 130 for Solar Cycle 25, we find that most methods largely failed to predict the peak correctly: Cycle 24 was statistically predicted to be a strong cycle, whereas Cycle 25 was predicted to be a weak cycle. By and large, predictions made only after the cycle began became closer to reality. ML-based models also produced discouraging results. The polar field and its proxy-based predictions are the most physically supported approach to prediction;…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
