26 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Numerical Simulations of the Geospace Response to the Arrival of an Idealized Perfect Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejection D. Welling et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020SW002489
2. How Hospitable Are Space Weather Affected Habitable Zones? The Role of Ion Escape V. Airapetian et al. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/836/1/L3
3. Polytropic index of magnetosheath ions based on homogeneous MHD Bernoulli Integral X. Pang et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JA022303
4. Associating ground magnetometer observations with current or voltage generators M. Hartinger et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JA024140
5. Response of the Geospace System to the Solar Wind Dynamic Pressure Decrease on 11 June 2017: Numerical Models and Observations D. Ozturk et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JA026315
6. The Impact of Radial and Non‐Radial IMF on the Earth's Magnetopause Size, Shape, and Dawn‐Dusk Asymmetry From Global 3D Kinetic Simulations S. Baraka et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JA029528
7. Tracking fast-mode wave propagation in Earth’s magnetosphere through GNSS signals Y. Hao et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-025-2973-4
8. A numerical simulation of a negative solar wind impulse: Revisited S. Fujita et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JA017526
9. Time‐Varying Magnetopause Reconnection During Sudden Commencement: Global MHD Simulations J. Eggington et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JA030006
10. Response of the magnetosphere–ionosphere system to sudden changes in solar wind dynamic pressure S. Fujita https://doi.org/10.1007/s41614-019-0025-1
11. Global Magnetosphere Response to Solar Wind Dynamic Pressure Pulses During Northward IMF Using the Heliophysics System Observatory S. Vidal‐Luengo & M. Moldwin https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA028587
12. Global MHD simulation of magnetospheric response of preliminary impulse to large and sudden enhancement of the solar wind dynamic pressure Y. Kubota et al. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-015-0270-7
13. Geosynchronous magnetic field responses to fast solar wind dynamic pressure enhancements: MHD field model T. Sun et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-30-1285-2012
14. Analysis of geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) during the May 2024 Gannon storm P. Amaechi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2026.06.055
15. The chain response of the magnetospheric and ground magnetic field to interplanetary shocks T. Sun et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JA020754
16. Understanding the response of the ionosphere-magnetosphere system to sudden solar wind density increases Y. Yu & A. Ridley https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JA015871
17. Modeling Study of the Geospace System Response to the Solar Wind Dynamic Pressure Enhancement on 17 March 2015 D. Ozturk et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JA025099
18. Meso-Scale Electrodynamic Coupling of the Earth Magnetosphere-Ionosphere System Y. Yu et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-022-00940-0
19. Response of Electric Field in Terrestrial Magnetosphere to Interplanetary Shock D. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac90cc
20. Observations of Impulsive Electric Fields Induced by Interplanetary Shock D. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078809
21. Magnetospheric and ionospheric vortices response to negative solar wind dynamic pressure pulse H. Zhao et al. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspas.2025.1679376
22. Response of the Ionospheric Equivalent Current Systems to Interplanetary Shocks Q. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.11728/cjss2013.05.486
23. IMF By effects on ground magnetometer response to increased solar wind dynamic pressure derived from global MHD simulations D. Ozturk et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JA023903
24. Magnetospheric and ionospheric vortices response to positive solar wind dynamic pressure pulse H. Zhao et al. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspas.2025.1679345
25. SC‐Associated Electric Field Variations in the Magnetosphere and Ionospheric Convective Flows S. Kim et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JA024611
26. Field‐Aligned Current During an Interval of BY‐Dominated Interplanetary‐Field; Modeled‐to‐Observed Comparisons J. Carter et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JA029722