Optimized ensemble single frequency ionospheric TEC model over the low latitude Indian region for GNSS applications
-
Raja Sekhar Chakali
Abstract
An ionospheric broadcast model in a low-cost single-frequency GNSS receiver provides ionospheric corrections to improve its positional accuracy. This study evaluates the performance of the Klobuchar, NeQuick-G models, and proposes an optimized ensemble ionospheric model during the minimum (2020) and maximum (2024) phases of Solar Cycle 25 over the Indian low-latitude and equatorial regions. Dual-frequency Total Electron Content (TEC) data from International GNSS Service (IGS) stations over the Indian region, including JMSM, LCK4, JDPR, SHLG, and IISC stations data were analysed to quantify the proposed ionospheric TEC model accuracy under both quiet and disturbed geomagnetic conditions. The year 2024 exhibited strong solar activity, with Dst values reaching −412 nT and Kp index up to 9 during the May 10-11 geomagnetic storm. Model errors were computed as the difference between observed and predicted Vertical TEC (VTEC) values. The proposed optimized ensemble model, based on performance-weighted integration of Klobuchar and NeQuick-G outputs, consistently achieved the lowest RMSE values, ranging from 1.66 TECU (winter 2020) to 6.98 TECU (May 2024 storm), compared with the NeQuick-G (up to 30.07 TECU) and Klobuchar (up to 40.02 TECU). The analysis of proposed optimized ensemble ionospheric model revealed clear seasonal behaviour capture, with VTEC maxima during the equinoxes (50–100 TECU) and minima during solstices (20–40 TECU). Results demonstrate that the optimized model significantly enhances ionospheric prediction accuracy under both quiet and storm-time conditions, offering a robust solution for single-frequency GNSS applications in low-latitude regions strongly affected by ionospheric variability.
Acknowledgments
This work is carried out under the DST NGP-sponsored project entitled “A Data Fusion and Deep Learning Approach for Geospatial Positioning in the 5G Era” with reference No NGP/GS-11/Venkata/KLEFDU/AP/2023(G), 28.08.2024.
-
Research ethics: Not applicable.
-
Informed consent: Not applicable.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None.
-
Conflict of interest: No conflict of interest to both authors.
-
Research funding: Nil.
-
Data availability: Not applicable.
References
1. Goss, WM, Hooker, C, Ekers, RD, editors. Ionospheric Research, 1895–1935 BT - Joe Pawsey and the Founding of Australian Radio Astronomy: Early Discoveries, from the Sun to the Cosmos. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2023:39–51 pp.10.1007/978-3-031-07916-0_5Suche in Google Scholar
2. Bagaje, MB, Terefe, DA, Data, EA, Gebino, G. Comparative performance analysis of IRI-2020 and AfriTEC ionospheric comparative performance analysis of IRI-2020 and AfriTEC ionospheric models over Ethiopia during geomagnetically disturbed periods. Am J Astron Astrophys 2025;12:90–105.10.11648/j.ajaa.20251203.14Suche in Google Scholar
3. Zhou, W, Yuan, Y, Tang, C, Meng, Y, Chen, Y. Ionosphere disturbances on GNSS signal and positioning performance: analysis of the solar flare and geomagnetic storm events in September 2017 and October 2021. Adv Space Res 2024;73:4608–20.10.1016/j.asr.2024.01.044Suche in Google Scholar
4. Seemala, GK, Katual, I, Kapil, C, Vichare, G. Seasonal and solar activity dependence of TEC over Bharati station, Antarctica. Polar Sci 2023;38:101001.10.1016/j.polar.2023.101001Suche in Google Scholar
5. Astafyeva, E, Yasyukevich, Y, Maksikov, A, Zhivetiev, I. Geomagnetic storms, super-storms and their impacts on GPS-based navigation systems. Space Weather 2014;12:508–25.10.1002/2014SW001072Suche in Google Scholar
6. Chakali, RS, Devanaboyina, VR. Performance evaluation of GNSS single-frequency ionospheric TEC fusion model during May 2024 geomagnetic storm event. Adv Space Res 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.06.082. In press.Suche in Google Scholar
7. Lakshmi Mallika, I, Venkata Ratnam, D, Raman, S, Sivavaraprasad, G. A new ionospheric model for single frequency GNSS user applications using Klobuchar model driven by auto regressive moving average (SAKARMA) method over Indian region. IEEE Access 2020;8:54535–53.10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2981365Suche in Google Scholar
8. Keokhumcheng, T, Kenpankho, P. The study of total electron content on ionosphere by using single frequency GPS receiver. Adv Space Res 2025;75:4245–59.10.1016/j.asr.2024.08.019Suche in Google Scholar
9. Ciećko, A, Grunwald, G. Klobuchar, NeQuick G, and EGNOS ionospheric models for GPS/EGNOS single-frequency positioning under 6-12 September 2017 space weather events. Appl Sci 2020;10:1553.10.3390/app10051553Suche in Google Scholar
10. Setti, PTJr, da Silva, CM, Alves, DBM. Assessing GNSS ionospheric models at low latitudes: BDGIM, NeQuick-G, and Klobuchar. GPS Solutions 2024;29:15.10.1007/s10291-024-01761-0Suche in Google Scholar
11. Wang, N, Yuan, Y, Li, Z, Huo, X. Improvement of Klobuchar model for GNSS single-frequency ionospheric delay corrections. Adv Space Res 2016;57:1555–69.10.1016/j.asr.2016.01.010Suche in Google Scholar
12. Sivakrishna, K, Venkata Ratnam, D, Sivavaraprasad, G. An improved NeQuick-G global ionospheric TEC model with a machine learning approach. GPS Solutions 2023;27:1–11.10.1007/s10291-023-01426-4Suche in Google Scholar
13. de Tarso Setti Júnior, P, Alves, DBM, da Silva, CM. Klobuchar and NeQuick G ionospheric models comparison for multi-GNSS single-frequency code point positioning in the Brazilian region. Bol Cienc Geodesicas 2019;25:1–12.10.1590/s1982-21702019000300016Suche in Google Scholar
14. Tian, Y, Li, S, Shen, H, Zhang, W, Hao, W. Comparative analysis of BDGIM, NeQuick-G, and Klobuchar ionospheric broadcast models. Astrophys Space Sci 2022;367:78.10.1007/s10509-022-04109-7Suche in Google Scholar
15. Ratovsky, KG, Shi, JK, Oinats, AV, Romanova, EB. Comparative study of high-latitude, mid-latitude and low-latitude ionosphere on basis of local empirical models. Adv Space Res 2014;54:509–16.10.1016/j.asr.2014.02.019Suche in Google Scholar
16. de Tarso Setti Júnior, P, Aquino, M, Veettil, SV, Alves, DBM, da Silva, CM. Seasonal analysis of Klobuchar and NeQuick G single-frequency ionospheric models performance in 2018. Adv Space Res 2021;68:4824–33.10.1016/j.asr.2020.11.013Suche in Google Scholar
17. Siri Lakshatha, K, Venkata Ratnam, D, Sivakrishna, K. Applicability of NeQuick G ionospheric model for single-frequency GNSS users over India. AIMS Geosci 2022;8:127–36.10.3934/geosci.2022008Suche in Google Scholar
18. Ngayap, U, Paparini, C, Porretta, M, Buist, P, Jacobsen, KS, Dähnn, M, et al.. Comparison of NeQuick G and Klobuchar model performances at single-frequency user level. Eng Proc 2023;54:1–10.10.3390/ENC2023-15475Suche in Google Scholar
19. Myint, LMM, Perwitasari, S, Nishioka, M, Saito, S, Kaewthongrach, R, Supnithi, P. Analysis of ionospheric and geomagnetic fields changes in Thailand during the May 2024 geomagnetic storm. Adv Space Res 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.01.071. In press.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
