one of the dynamic reconfiguration processes of the magnetosphere is called substorm and is a key process responsible for the energy transport and release in the terrestrial magnetosphere .
it is believed that reconnection is responsible for the break of stability in the magnetospheric configuration and also for the transfer from magnetic to kinetic energy , e.g. @xcite . during this process
the magnetic field forms a so - called x - line surrounded by the diffusion region , where acceleration of particles takes place . in the diffusion region
the electric field accelerates high - energy ions and electrons away from the magnetic reconnection region and electrons at low - energy flow toward the reconnection site simultaneously @xcite .
the energetic particles are released as bursty bulk flows and are widely studied by e.g. @xcite .
the bursty bulk flows often contain structures with closed magnetic field lines  plasmoids .
such a large tailward - moving loop - like magnetic structure is generated as the result of x - type reconnection on the closed field lines in the near magnetotail @xcite . in two dimensions
the typical observational signatures of a plasmoid have been defined by a bipolar magnetic deflection in the meridional direction .
the examination of the three - dimensional topology and morphology of plasmoids in the earth s magnetotail showed rather complicated configurations compared to the original 2-dimensional hones scenario : helical flux ropes and travelling compression regions ( tcrs ) detected as moving magnetic imprints of a plasmoid in the lobes @xcite .
a tailward moving plasmoid in the central plasma sheet temporarily compresses the magnetic flux in the tail lobes because the cross - sectional area of the lobe is reduced . in the area between the central plasma sheet and lobe a layer of particles moving parallel to the magnetic field
arises from a rapid change of the flux tube volume outside the diffusion region @xcite .
however , these field - aligned beams could also be of a different origin than reconnection , e.g. due to fermi acceleration @xcite . thus in the terrestrial magnetosphere
two distinct groups of field - aligned beams can be derived : + ( 1 ) field - aligned ion beams accompanied with field - aligned electrons and associated with the x - line reconnection ; + ( 2 ) ion field - aligned beams accompanied by isotropic electrons accelerated by the quasi - steady dawn - dusk electric field .
substorm - like ( or ) reconfiguration processes have been observed at jupiter by the particle and fields instruments onboard the galileo spacecraft @xcite .
it is believed that the reconfiguration processes in the jovian magnetosphere are rather internally driven by ion mass loading from the moon io and fast planetary rotation , although we can not fully exclude the influence of the solar wind @xcite .
this internal driving mechanism leads to a periodic release of plasma in the magnetotail with a repetition period of about 3 days .
the thinning of the plasma sheet prior to the mass release reminds the growth phase of the terrestrial substorm @xcite .
this plasma sheet reconfiguration due to internal energy loading leads to a formation of the x - line in the jovian magnetotail at approximately 80 @xmath0 @xcite .
the scale size of downtail released plasmoids was estimated to be about 9 @xmath0 @xcite .
reconnection processes at jupiter seem to play an important role in the reconfiguration process as reported by @xcite .
reconnection conditions in the jovian magnetotail are satisfied just before the energetic particle release @xcite .
statistical studies of bursty bulk flows and plasmoids were carried out by @xcite . also data from the new horizons spacecraft during
the jupiter flyby showed evidence of periodic plasma injections possibly caused by reconnection @xcite .
some field - aligned beams were discussed in the substorm - like context by @xcite . in this paper , we show for the first time observations of a tcr and plasmoids together with field - aligned beams and consider their features more detailed in the context of x - line reconnection using data from the galileo energetic particle detector ( epd ) @xcite and from the magnetometer ( mag ) @xcite .
the paper is organized as follows : in section [ sec:1 ] we introduce shortly the instruments onboard galileo used to identify field - aligned beam features in the measurements . in section [ scene ]
we present a typical jovian reconfiguration event with field - aligned beams and dynamic processes preceding and following the beam . in sections
[ timing]-[event:4 ] we show examples of four field - aligned beams and their wide spectrum of characteristics .
section [ discussion ] discusses results and provides a statistical analysis .
section [ summary ] summarizes the observations .
the epd was an instrument onboard the galileo spacecraft designed to measure the characteristics of the charged particle population such as energies , intensities , ion composition and angular distribution to determine , in particular , the configuration of the jovian magnetosphere @xcite .
the advantages of the epd instrument compared to similar instruments on previous missions were the @xmath1 steradian angular coverage for jovian energetic particles and the extended coverage of particle energies .
epd consisted of two double - headed detector telescopes : the low energy magnetospheric measurement system ( lemms ) and the composition measurement system ( cms ) .
cms measured the ion fluxes with discriminating ion species using the time - of - flight technique .
its energy ranges were 80 to 1250 kev ( protons ) , 27 kev / nuc to 1 mev / nuc ( helium ions ) , 12 to 562 kev / nuc ( oxygen ions ) , and 16 to 310 kev / nuc ( sulfur ions ) .
on the other hand , lemms observed the electron flux in the energy range between 15 and 11000 kev and the species - integrated ion flux between 22 and 12400 kev . in this case
electrons and ions were separated by a permanent magnet .
although these telescopes have narrow field - of - view ( the full opening angles are 18@xmath2 and 15@xmath2 for cms and lemms , respectively ) , an almost full - sphere coverage is achieved by the motion of a turntable combined with the spacecraft spin ( the exception is a small solid angle ( @xmath3 0.1 sr ) along the spin axis which is blocked to avoid direct sun light in the detector ) .
the unit sphere is divided into 16 ( see figure 6.2 , in @xcite ) or 6 sectors dependent on the energy channel . to study the flow direction
we analyze 16-sector resolution data in this work .
data are accumulated within sampling times of @xmath411.5 min ( for this study ) and allocated to the angular sectors .
each sector is @xmath545@xmath2 wide . in the record time mode epd
/ lemms count rates are sampled every 1.25 seconds over up to 64 sectors .
the description of lemms and cms energy channels used in our analysis one can find in table [ t2le ] .
the first order anisotropies were calculated using technique described by @xcite , and references therein .
the pitch angle distributions ( pad ) are presented in the detector frame  detector pitch angles ( dpa ) .
the flow is parallel to the magnetic field when dpa is close to 180@xmath6 and respectively anti - parallel when dpa is close to 0@xmath6 .
particle pitch angles are determined with the magnetic field data obtained by the galileo magnetometer .
we discuss pitch angles only when the magnetic field direction varies insignificantly during a sampling time , since otherwise the pitch angle determination is unreliable .
the magnetic field observations have a time resolution of @xmath424 s , which is much higher than that of the particle measurements .
this does not affect our results , however , as we compare the observed field - aligned beams in the particle data with features in the magnetic field and not the other way around .
still , it is very likely that we miss many events with time scales less than 11 min in the epd data set .
a typical substorm - like or reconfiguration event in the jovian magnetosphere is shown in figure [ 15 ] .
the figure shows the time interval from day 1997 151 , 06:00 to day 154 , 02:00 . during this time galileo
was located in the midnight sector of the jovian magnetotail ( 0116 local time ( lt ) ) at about a radial distance r = 100 @xmath7 the upper panel displays omnidirectional ion intensities in seven energy channels covering the energy range between 22 kev ( a1 channel ) and 3.2 mev ( a7 channel ) .
the second panel from the top shows the radial ( red ) and azimuthal ( green ) component of the ion directional flow anisotropy as derived from measurements of 65 - 120 kev ions .
the lower two panels present the magnitude and components of the measured magnetic field in the siii - system . in this system
the radial magnetic field component is positive in the radially outward direction , the azimuthal component is positive in the direction of jupiter s rotation and the south - north ( meridional ) component is positive southward @xcite .
first signatures of a mass - release process are observed at day 152 , 07:00 with an unusual ( for the lobe region ) increase of the ion intensities ( see vertical dashed line ( 1 ) in figure [ 15 ] ) .
the corotational flow , typical for the jovian magnetosphere ( see the ion anisotropy denoted by the green line in the second panel from the top ) is disrupted by a strong tailward ( radially outward ) directed anisotropy spike or an field - aligned ion beam ( the red line ) in the lobe / psbl ( that the beam is field - aligned will be proven later ) .
this is followed by the bursty flow ion anisotropy event or bursty bulk flow ( denoted by the vertical dashed line ( 2 ) ) which arrives with bipolar features in the south - north magnetic field component at day 152 , 10:00 when galileo approached the vicinity of the current sheet center .
about 16 hours later another group of tailward directed bursts with similar characteristics arrives ( see vertical dashed lines ( 3 ) and ( 4 ) in figure [ 15 ] ) .
then in the subsequent plasma sheet encounter radially inward directed bursts ( the negative red spikes ) are observed implying that the x - line moved tailward over the spacecraft .
the observations of the flow reversals are very typical for the jovian magnetotail , see e.g. @xcite .
it is interesting that just before the bursty flows the plasma sheet changed its displacement relative to the spacecraft from being more in the southern part of the plasma sheet to being in the northern part of the plasma sheet almost all of the presented time ( according to the radial magnetic field component behavior ) .
such plasma sheet displacements were discussed by @xcite .
they suggest that these displacements could be associated to a change in the solar wind conditions .
more details on the reconfiguration or substorm - like events can be found in @xcite .
this example is shown to present the global picture of the magnetotail dynamics before going into details .
one example of a field - aligned beam during reconfiguration events is shown in figure [ 15 ] .
it was recorded at 100 @xmath0 away from the planet in the magnetotail , on day 97 152 , 06:30 - 09:00 . the detailed particle and the magnetic field observations for this event are presented in figure [ 152 ] and the location relative to the plasma sheet configuration is sketched in figure [ scetch ] .
according to the strength and direction of the magnetic field the spacecraft was located in the north lobe / or psbl .
first the electrons arrive with energies from 15 to 304 kev ( see electron intensities in figure [ 152 ] , panel 1 ) at 0659 ut .
these electrons were flowing parallel to the magnetic field in the lobe region ( see the increase in electron intensities close to 180@xmath6 in dpa distributions , panel 4 ) .
after 0659 ut electrons moved bi - directionally parallel to the magnetic field ( see the increase in intensities close to 0@xmath6 and 180@xmath6 ) . between 0710 ut and 0750 ut
the observed electrons changed their direction of motion from being anti - parallel 0710 - 0721 ut to mainly parallel 0721 - 0750 ut relatively to the magnetic field . at 0750 ut
the electron distribution becomes isotropic .
this field - aligned electron beam is associated with the reconfiguration event from the list published by @xcite . after the field - aligned beam was observed the plasma sheet center moved towards galileo ( see section [ scene ] , figure [ 15 ] ) . as it is expected from the reconnection scenario the bulk release of particles (
see vertical dashed line ( 2 ) in figure [ 15 ] ) at the alfvnic speed is observed at 1200 ut on day 152 , as studied by @xcite . from the comparison of the flow speed of the bursty bulk
flows was compared with the alfvn speed .
we can assume that during this time the reconnection process was ongoing and that the electron beam has possibly been mirrored at the next x - point as in a magnetic bottle bouncing between two mirror points on loop field lines ( i.e. multiple x - line formation is assumed , see also kasahara et al .
, submitted to jgr ) or launched from another x - line .
also the bi - directional streaming electrons are commonly observed in the terrestrial plasma sheet boundary layers @xcite .
ions arrived at least 11 min later at 0710 ut .
the third panel of figure [ 152 ] shows the first order directional anisotropy components of ions ( 65 - 120 kev ) in radial and azimuthal directions . during this event the ions moved clearly predominantly radially outward with an anti - corotational component .
those ions moved also along the magnetic field direction as indicated in the pitch angle distributions ( panel 5 of figure [ 152 ] ) .
ion fluxes exhibit an energy dispersion in the sense that the intensities of high energy ions increase first .
assuming that the electrons have a single source ( e.g. released at the reconnection site during the onset phase ) , the distance from galileo to the source ( e.g. the reconnection line ) can be roughly estimated from the delay time between different species .
we must point out that the time resolution of the epd data is 11 minutes and therefore the following calculations have large error bars .
ions measured in the a1 channel ( 42 - 65 kev ) , mainly protons , with a geometric mean energy of 52 kev ( speed of @xmath4 3200 km s@xmath8 ) arrive @xmath4 22 min later than electrons .
this gives a distance of 60 @xmath9 30 @xmath7 according to these calculations the distance from the source to galileo was between 30 @xmath0 and 90 @xmath0 .
consequently a source would be located at @xmath4 40 @xmath9 30 @xmath0 from the planet .
the source location is slightly closer to the planet than those derived by @xcite but still similar within the error bar .
even if the delay calculations are rough , this event presents an energy dispersion of different particles : electrons arrive first , and then high energy ions followed later by lower energy ions .
this implies a single source of these field - aligned beams .
one can claim that the observed dispersion is related to gyroradius effect or gradient effects .
we estimate the gyroperiod of the proton of @xmath49 s in this magnetic environment .
we see that the accumulation time of 11 min is much longer than the proton gyroperiod .
additionally , the spacecraft passes 0.002 @xmath0 during one accumulation time of the epd instrument ( the galileo speed is @xmath43.2@xmath1010@xmath11 @xmath12 ) .
this distance is the same order of magnitude as the proton gyroradius of a field - aligned beam .
therefore , the spacecraft could be considered basically stationary relative to the ion motion .
the ion dispersion is also not related to @xmath13 drift , as they would lead to much longer time delays .
another field - aligned beam was observed during the reconfiguration event on doy 153 at 0620 and is shown by vertical dashed line ( 3 ) in figure [ 15 ] .
details are presented in figure [ 153 ] in the same format as for event 1 in figure [ 152 ] . during this beam significant increases by more than one order of magnitude of the ion intensities ( 42 kev to 1.7 mev ) and by one order of magnitude of the electron intensities ( 15 to 304 kev )
are observed .
again , the first order flow anisotropy shows that the ions during this event were flowing radially outward in anti - corotational direction .
location of this event relative to the plasma sheet configuration is sketched in figure [ scetch ] .
the meridional magnetic field component @xmath14 becomes negative at 0625 ut ( northward directed ) suggesting a tailward flow in the plasma sheet @xcite in case of a neutral line formation . at the same time
the field - aligned electrons followed by the field - aligned ions ( arrived later at 0636 ut ) are observed .
the delays between electrons and ions are the same as in the example in section [ timing ] suggesting similar nature of the field - aligned beam . at @xmath40640
ut a signature of a flux rope or tcr is seen in the magnetic field , i.e. increase in the radial magnetic field component , bipolar signature in the meridional magnetic field component . additionally , the disappearance of the anti - phase signature between the azimuthal and radial magnetic field components as in usual quiet configuration ( @xmath15 reaching zero ) is observed .
the flux rope - like magnetic field ( increased radial magnetic field component together with the bipolar signature in the meridional magnetic field component , see e.g. , @xcite ) is associated with ion field - aligned beam parallel to the magnetic field .
the proton intensity increased by almost 3 orders of magnitude .
after the flux - rope structure decaying oscillations in the meridional magnetic field component are observed .
these oscillations could indicate small scale magnetic islands ( probably created by magnetic reconnection ) , or they are imprints of the post - plasmoid plasma sheet structure as shown in @xcite .
we conclude that these field - aligned electron and ion beams are ( 1 ) associated with tcr mentioned as a reconnection event in the study of @xcite , ( 2 ) followed by the bursty bulk flow reversal ( see vertical line ( 4 ) in figure [ 15 ] ) , and ( 3 ) show the energy dispersion .
all these features imply that the observed field - aligned electron and ion beams are associated with a reconnection process .
another example of field - aligned particle beams is shown in figure [ 283 ] observed on day 1996 283 from 1100 to 1500 ut . during this time galileo
was located in the pre - dawn sector of the magnetotail ( 03:19 lt ) at r = 113 @xmath7 location of this event relative to the plasma sheet configuration is sketched in figure [ scetch ] .
these field - aligned beams preceded the bursty bulk flows in the reconfiguration event from the list by @xcite .
the first order flow anisotropy shows that the ions during this event flow radially outward in anti - corotational direction . here again the dispersion is observed . at @xmath41151 ut , a bi - directional , field - aligned electron flow ( 29 to 42 kev ) arrival was observed ( seen in the dpa distribution ) .
then at @xmath41214 ut the electron flux was mono - directional field - aligned and changed to bi - directional field - aligned again between @xmath41225 and @xmath41259 ut . simultaneously with this strong electron beam ( in our time resolution ) protons with energies from 220 to 540 kev arrived at @xmath41214 ut . at @xmath41225 ut the field - aligned ions with energies of 65 - 120 kev and protons ( 80 to 220 kev ) followed by oxygen ( 26 to 51 kev / nuc ) arrived at @xmath41248 ut and eventually sulfur ( 16 to 30 kev / nuc ) at @xmath41236 ut . assuming that the x - line as the source of all these flows , this scenario can be checked . as the arrival of the electrons is not clearly determined , we estimate the distance x to the x - line using the formula @xmath16 where @xmath17 is the sulfur speed and @xmath18 is the proton speed , @xmath19 is the time delay between the arrival of protons and sulfur @xmath423 min .
we obtain the distance from galileo to the x - line equal to 52@xmath20 26 @xmath0 .
this also agrees with the statistical x - line derived by @xcite . for the given location it is approximately at 70 @xmath0 .
therefore , it is likely that particles were released from a single extended source and the time - of - flight dispersion theory works and the presented example fits the x - line reconnection scenario .
it is not likely that gyroradius effects and gradient effects influence the results for this event , as the magnetic field during the field - aligned beam was stable and the spacecraft was approximately at the same position in the lobe region .
we also note that this event was not considered as a reconnection event by @xcite .
figure [ hr ] presents an event on doy 235 of 1997 showing the spacial structure of the electron beam . during this event galileo
was located in the pre - dawn sector of the magnetotail ( 00:56 lt ) at r = 129.9 @xmath7 as the particle data were acquired with the full time resolution in this particular period , we see the covered pitch angle and the associated particle flux due to the instrument rotation . the magnetic field is plotted in siii coordinate system .
galileo was located southward of the current sheet center during most of this period .
anti - parallel field - aligned electron beam is observed in several channels ( 15 to 188 kev ) , from @xmath21 to @xmath22 ut ( see in dpa distributions as red dots close to 0@xmath6 ) .
the beam almost disappeared during 1427 - 1429 ut , indicating that this is the intermittent and/or localized beam .
this beam is associated with the bipolar signatures in the meridional magnetic field component at @xmath41420 ut .
this event shows a mono - directional electron beam , consistent with an x - line planetward of the galileo spacecraft .
the field - aligned ion beam is seen at energies 65 - 120 kev and 42 - 65 kev during 1443 - 1455 ut . during the neutral sheet approaching at around 1443 - 1455 ut ,
electron flux is enhanced by a factor of @xmath42 compare to the period at @xmath41420 - 1435 ut in the plasma sheet boundary layer , the particle distribution is isotropic .
the fluxes in the plasma sheet are higher compared to those at the boundary layer .
all these suggests a closed field line topology @xcite . an unambiguous evidence of the beam layer structure is seen .
namely , the electron beam propagates at the outer edge of the thin current sheet and an isotropic distribution is observed around the current sheet center .
this can not be clearly evidenced by low - resolution data due to the ambiguous pitch angle determination around the magnetic field reversal .
the field - aligned beam is preceded by the plasmoids and associated with the magnetic field dipolarization .
the meridional magnetic field component is already negative before ( unfortunately the particle data are not available in that resolution before @xmath41408 ut ) .
therefore , there could be a formation of a large plasmoid or post plasmoid plasma sheet followed by smaller asymmetric plasmoid ( at @xmath41414 ut ) and dipolarization ( at @xmath41420 ut ) characterized by a strong and steep increase of the meridional magnetic field component , preceded by a much less negative dip , as in the terrestrial cases observed and simulated by e.g. @xcite .
this bipolar change of the meridian magnetic field component followed by a dipolarization front can also be explained to be caused by the tailward movement of reconnection site , followed further by dipolarization of the magnetic field at planetward side of reconnection site . during the plasmoid passage ,
the neutral sheet crossing took place during between 1414 and 1416 ut and no electron flux enhancement was observed .
this is different from the terrestrial case where the plasmoids centers are associated with increases in the electron flux @xcite .
an approximate location of the spacecraft trajectory relative to the plasma sheet configuration , between 14:00 and 14:18 ut , is sketched in figure [ scetch ] .
in the previous section we presented examples of the field - aligned electron and ion beams in energetic particle data measured onboard the galileo spacecraft in the jovian magnetotail .
we investigated the galileo orbits g2 , e6 , g8 , c9 , c10 and e16 , searched for such field - aligned beams and found 30 events .
for these events we required : + ( 1 ) observation during more than one accumulation time ( that excludes spikes due to instrumental effects ) ; + ( 2 ) the radial flow anisotropy dominates the corotational one and + ( 3 ) the ion pitch angle distributions show that the particle flow is predominantly parallel / anti - parallel to the magnetic field .
the distribution of these events in the jovian magnetosphere along the galileo orbits is shown in figure [ map ] .
it is possible that due to the low time resolution of the epd instrument many field - aligned beams were not detected .
we listed the duration of the field - aligned beams in table [ events ] , which is on average 55.6 minutes .
statistically most events have a duration between 20 and 40 minutes ( see the occurrence rate of field - aligned beams versus its duration in figure [ hist ] ) .
the distribution of events versus duration time confirms that it is likely that many field - aligned beams have shorter duration than 20 minutes .
all 30 field - aligned beams investigated in this study are associated with those 34 jovian reconfiguration events listed in @xcite . during 15 of them
we observe the field - aligned beams . during 8 of these 15 events
several field - aligned beams are seen .
these field - aligned beams seem to be a constituent part of the jovian reconfiguration process . in figure [ map ]
we show the location of the x - lines derived by @xcite and @xcite .
the field - aligned beams are concentrated close to these lines .
therefore , we believe that the field - aligned beams are signatures of reconnection , which occur during the reconfiguration in the jovian magnetotail
. now we would like to estimate the mass and energy input of the field - aligned beams in the content of the jovian energy budget .
the mass which carries a field - aligned beam can be estimated as follows : @xmath23 where @xmath24 is a typical number density in the jovian magnetotail @xcite .
we assume that oxygen is the average ion contained in the jovian plasma sheet . the volume , @xmath25 of the field - aligned beam can be assessed as the length of the beam @xmath26 where @xmath27 is the field - aligned beam speed and @xmath28 is the duration , multiplied with the assumed vertical extent 1 @xmath0 and the azimuthal extent 25 @xmath0 . as average speed of the field - aligned beam we use the speed of the ions in the plasma sheet boundary layers , 800 km s@xmath8 derived by @xcite and as duration we take an average duration of the field - aligned beam derived above , @xmath460 min .
therefore , the mass release during one field - aligned beam is in the order of 100 tons .
this is lower compared to the mass of plasmoids derived by @xcite , 800 tons and 2500 tons , respectively .
the kinetic energy of the field - aligned beam can be evaluated from the formula @xmath29 this will lead to @xmath30j . therefore , the power of the field - aligned beam will be in the order of 9 tw , for an averaged duration of the beam of @xmath460 min .
this power will be enough to supply for instance jovian polar auroral emissions , see ( e.g. , * ? ? ?
in this paper we investigated the events in the psbl or lobe regions . according to the x - type reconnection scenario by @xcite , we observe the field - aligned electron and ion beams in the psbl . in the paper of @xcite , two types of electron distribution
are reported : ( 1 ) when the electrons are isotropic and ( 2 ) when electrons flow along the magnetic field lines .
the first case is associated with the non - adiabatic acceleration by the quasi - steady dawn - dusk electric field and is not necessary associated with substorm - like activity .
the beams of the second type are usually generated close to the x - line .
we check the distribution of the particle flux in the three directions relative to the magnetic field using the dpa : anti - parallel , dpa@xmath3140@xmath32 parallel , dpa@xmath33140@xmath6 and perpendicular , 70@xmath34dpa@xmath31110@xmath6 .
we would like to note that due to the plasma corotation in the jovian plasma sheet , many of the field - aligned flows will still have quite a substantial corotational component .
this is reflected in the pitch angle distributions as an increased perpendicular component .
23 events with field - aligned ion beams are associated with anisotropic electrons , i.e. which flow along the magnetic field and 13 of them are associated with reconnection events studied by @xcite derived from the magnetometer data .
the characteristics of the field - aligned ion beams are seen in table [ events ] .
the propagation of the ions and electrons parallel or antiparallel to the magnetic field confirm the quadrupolar x - line configuration , see figure [ scetch ] .
slightly more than half of the field - aligned beams are associated with reconnection events observed by @xcite .
why not more ? the reasons could be ( 1 ) different arrival times of field - aligned beams and plasmoids ; ( 2 ) the field - aligned beams are mainly located in the lobe region where reconnection signatures might be smoothed . in 7 cases
field - aligned ion beams are associated with the isotropic electron distribution , see table [ events ] .
therefore , they might be accelerated not at the x - line .
most of these events , namely 5 , has no association with the reconnection events from @xcite .
this is expected .
\(1 ) we presented two examples ( event 1 , event 3 ) of the counterstreaming electron beams in the plasma sheet boundary layers . according to @xcite
the counterstreaming electron beams occur due to the bouncing between two mirror points on closed field lines in the plasma sheet .
they could also occur due to the travelling of electrons between multiple x - lines .
( 2 ) most of the field - aligned ion events are associated with the field - aligned electron beams which according to @xcite are related to electron acceleration in the x - line vicinity .
( 3 ) the timing of the arrival of the field - aligned beams for the different species in many events ( e.g. event 1 , event 2 , event 3 ) is in accordance to the time - dispersion when the source is at one point / line @xcite .
also @xcite observed the time dispersion of the energetic ions of different species using data from new horizons .
( 4 ) observations of all types of the plasma release from plasmoid or flux rope , its imprint in the psbl  tcr and dipolarization are in accordance to the reconnection theory and all are associated with the electron and ion field - aligned beams ( event 2 , event 3 , event 4 ) .
( 5 ) we show evidence that the electron beam propagates in the psbl while isotropic distribution is observed around the current sheet center ( event 4 ) .
( 6 ) observations of the flow reversals in 53@xmath35 of the jovian reconfiguration events from @xcite imply x - line crossing , see an example in section [ scene ] , figure [ 15 ] .
( 7 ) all field - aligned beams are associated with the jovian reconfiguration events .
based on all these arguments we believe that reconfiguration processes in the jovian magnetotail are associated with reconnection .
the authors thank a. lagg for the provided epd software and useful discussions .
49 natexlab#1#1url # 1`#1`urlprefix , a. , taylor , m.  g.  g.  t. , borg , a.  l. , lavraud , b. , friedel , r.  w.  h. , escoubet , c.  p. , laakso , h. , daly , p. , fazakerley , a.  n. , may 2008 .
multispacecraft observation of electron beam in reconnection region .
j. geophys .
113 , 7 . ,
v. , kennel , c.  f. , coroniti , f.  v. , pellat , r. , kivelson , m.  g. , walker , r.  j. , russell , c.  t. , baumjohann , w. , feldman , w.  c. , gosling , j.  t. , nov .
statistical characteristics of bursty bulk flow events .
j. geophys .
99 , 2125721280 . ,
v. , mcfadden , j.  p. , larson , d. , carlson , c.  w. , mende , s.  b. , frey , h. , phan , t. , sibeck , d.  g. , glassmeier , k .- h . ,
auster , u. , donovan , e. , mann , i.  r. , rae , i.  j. , russell , c.  t. , runov , a. , zhou , x .- z . , kepko , l. , aug .
tail reconnection triggering substorm onset .
science 321 , 931935 . ,
f. , delamere , p.  a. , may 2011 .
flow of mass and energy in the magnetospheres of jupiter and saturn .
journal of geophysical research ( space physics ) 116 , a05209 .
, l .- j . , bhattacharjee , a. , puhl - quinn , p.  a. , yang , h. , bessho , n. , imada , s. , mhlbachler , s. , daly , p.  w. , lefebvre , b. , khotyaintsev , y. , vaivads , a. , fazakerley , a. , georgescu , e. , jan .
observation of energetic electrons within magnetic islands .
nature physics 4 , 1923 .
, a.  j. , 1983 .
coordinate systems . in : dessler , a.j .
( editor ) , physics of the jovian magnetosphere , cambridge university press .
, l.  a. , paterson , w.  r. , khurana , k.  k. , jan . 2002 .
observations of thermal plasmas in jupiter s magnetotail .
j. geophys .
107 , a1 , 1003 . , y.  s. , jian , l.  k. , russell , c.  t. , dec .
growth phase of jovian substorms .
34 , l23106 . ,
y.  s. , raeder , j. , angelopoulos , v. , gilson , m.  l. , runov , a. , jan . 2011 . interaction of dipolarization fronts within multiple bursty bulk flows in global mhd simulations of a substorm on 27 february 2009 .
j. geophys .
116 , a00i23 .
, y.  s. , russell , c.  t. , khurana , k.  k. , sep . 2010 .
reconnection sites in jupiter s magnetotail and relation to jovian auroras .
space sci .
58 , 14551469 .
, e.  e. , hoshino , m. , hirai , m. , mukai , t. , zelenyi , l.  m. , mar .
. `` geography '' of ion acceleration in the magnetotail : x - line versus current sheet effects .
j. geophys .
114 , a03203 . ,
m.  e. , haggerty , d.  k. , mcnutt , r.  l. , paranicas , c.  p. , nov .
energetic particle evidence for magnetic filaments in jupiter s magnetotail .
114 , 11201 .
, e.  w. , may 1979 .
transient phenomena in the magnetotail and their relation to substorms .
space science reviews 23 , 393410 . ,
a. , rme , h. , dandouras , i. , bosqued , j.  m. , sergeev , v. , sauvaud , j. , jacquey , c. , lavraud , b. , louarn , p. , moreau , t. , vallat , c. , escoubet , c.  p. , parks , g.  k. , mccarthy , m. , mbius , e. , amata , e. , klecker , b. , korth , a. , lundin , r. , daly , p. , zong , q. , may 2004 .
new properties of energy - dispersed ions in the plasma sheet boundary layer observed by cluster .
j. geophys .
109 , a05215 .
, m.  g. , khurana , k.  k. , means , j.  d. , russell , c.  t. , snare , r.  c. , 1992 . the galileo magnetic field investigation
. space science reviews 60 , 357383 . , e.  a. , , woch , j. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , daly , p.  w. , korth , a. , 2008 .
comparison of periodic substorms at jupiter and earth .
j. geophys .
113 , a04212 .
, e.  a. , glassmeier , k .- h . ,
woch , j. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , dougherty , m.  k. , may 2007 . a possible intrinsic mechanism for the quasi - periodic dynamics of the jovian magnetosphere .
j. geophys .
112 , a05203 .
, e.  a. , woch , j. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , oct .
mass release process in the jovian magnetosphere : statistics on particle burst parameters .
j. geophys .
113 , a10202 .
, e.  a. , woch , j. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , jun .
2009 . a summary of observational records on periodicities above the rotational period in the jovian magnetosphere .
annales geophysicae 27 , 25652573 .
, e.  a. , woch , j. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , khurana , k.  k. , glassmeier , k .- h . , mar .
mass release at jupiter : substorm - like processes in the jovian magnetotail .
j. geophys .
110 , a03211 . , n. , lagg , a. , livi , s. , wilken , b. , woch , j. , roelof , e.  c. , williams , d.  j. , nov
global flows of energetic ions in jupiter s equatorial plane : first - order approximation .
j. geophys .
106 , 2601726032 . , n. , woch , j. , lagg , a. , wilken , b. , livi , s. , williams , d.  j. , apr . 1998 .
energetic particle bursts in the predawn jovian magnetotail .
25 , 12491252 . ,
a. , 1998 .
energiereiche teilchen in der inneren jupitermagnetosphre : simulation und ergebnisse des epd - experimentes an bord der raumsonde galileo .
thesis , university of innsbruck .
, m. , ieroset , m. , phan , t.  d. , lin , r.  p. , fujimoto , m. , mar .
field - aligned electrons at the lobe / plasma sheet boundary in the mid - to - distant magnetotail and their association with reconnection .
33 , l05101 .
, d.  j. , allegrini , f. , bagenal , f. , crary , f. , ebert , r.  w. , elliott , h. , stern , a. , valek , p. , oct .
diverse plasma populations and structures in jupiter s magnetotail .
science 318 , 217220 . , r.  l. , haggerty , d.  k. , hill , m.  e. , krimigis , s.  m. , livi , s. , ho , g.  c. , gurnee , r.  s. , mauk , b.  h. , mitchell , d.  g. , roelof , e.  c. , mccomas , d.  j. , bagenal , f. , elliott , h.  a. , brown , l.  e. , kusterer , m. , vandegriff , j. , stern , s.  a. , weaver , h.  a. , spencer , j.  r. , moore , j.  m. , oct . 2007 .
energetic particles in the jovian magnetotail .
science 318 , 220222 . ,
t. , 2000 .
plasma distribution functions in plasmoids : geotail observations .
advances in space research 26 , 415424 . , t. , shinohara , i. , fujimoto , m. , hoshino , m. , saito , y. , machida , s. , mukai , t. , nov . 2001 .
geotail observations of the hall current system : evidence of magnetic reconnection in the magnetotail
. j. geophys .
106 , 2592925950 . ,
reconnection in the jovian magnetosphere .
10 , 451454 . ,
a. , grodent , d. , grard , j .- c . ,
bonfond , b. , jul .
auroral signatures of flow bursts released during magnetotail reconnection at jupiter .
journal of geophysical research ( space physics ) 115 , a07214 . ,
a. , angelopoulos , v. , sitnov , m.  i. , sergeev , v.  a. , bonnell , j. , mcfadden , j.  p. , larson , d. , glassmeier , k. , auster , u. , jul .
themis observations of an earthward - propagating dipolarization front .
36 , a014106 . , c.  t. , khurana , k.  k. , huddleston , d.  e. , kivelson , m.  g. , may 1998 .
localized reconnection in the near jovian magnetotail .
science 280 , 10611064 .
, c.  t. , khurana , k.  k. , kivelson , m.  g. , huddleston , d.  e. , 2000
. substorms at jupiter : galileo observations of transient reconnection in the near tail .
advances in space research 26 , 14991504 . , d.  v. , sarris , e.  t. , angelopoulos , v. , yamamoto , t. , kokubun , s. , oct
. 1997 . spatial structure of the plasma sheet boundary layer at distances greater than 180 r e as derived from energetic particle measurements on geotail .
annales geophysicae 15 , 12461256 . , k. , 2007 . physics of space plasma activity . cambridge . ,
m.  i. , swisdak , m. , divin , a.  v. , apr . 2009 .
dipolarization fronts as a signature of transient reconnection in the magnetotail .
j. geophys .
114 , a04202 .
, j.  a. , owen , c.  j. , dunlop , m.  w. , bor " alv , e. , moldwin , m.  b. , sibeck , d.  g. , tanskanen , e. , goldstein , m.  l. , fazakerley , a. , balogh , a. , lucek , e. , richter , i. , reme , h. , bosqued , j.  m. , dec . 2003 .
cluster four spacecraft measurements of small traveling compression regions in the near - tail .
, j.  a. , owen , c.  j. , kuznetsova , m.  m. , hesse , m. , 1995 .
isee 3 observations of plasmoids with flux rope magnetic topologies .
22 , 20612064 . , v.  m. , frank , l.  a. , ackerson , k.  l. , paterson , w.  r. , 1997 .
geometry of the plasma sheet in the midnight - to - dawn sector of the jovian magnetosphere : plasma observations with the galileo spacecraft .
24 , 869872 . , i.  i. , fritz , t.  a. , zong , q. , sarris , e.  t. , aug . 2006 .
two distinct energetic electron populations of different origin in the earth s magnetotail : a cluster case study . annales
geophysicae 24 , 19311948 . , m.  f. , kivelson , m.  g. , khurana , k.  k. , joy , s.  p. , walker , r.  j. , jun .
reconnection and flows in the jovian magnetotail as inferred from magnetometer observations .
j. geophys .
115 , a06219 .
, l.  s. , fritz , t.  a. , kivelson , m.  g. , khurana , k. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , may 2005 .
jovian plasma sheet morphology : particle and field observations by the galileo spacecraft .
space sci .
53 , 681692 .
, a.  p. , owen , c.  j. , fazakerley , a.  n. , forsyth , c. , dandouras , i. , mar . 2011 .
average magnetotail electron and proton pitch angle distributions from cluster peace and cis observations .
380 , l06103 . , d.  j. , mcentire , r.  w. , jaskulek , s. , wilken , b. , 1992 .
the galileo energetic particles detector .
space science reviews 60 , 385412 . ,
j. , krupp , n. , khurana , k.  k. , kivelson , m.  g. , roux , a. , perraut , s. , louarn , p. , lagg , a. , williams , d.  j. , livi , s. , wilken , b. , jul . 1999 .
plasma sheet dynamics in the jovian magnetotail : signatures for substorm - like processes ?
26 , 21372140 . , j. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , apr
particle bursts in the jovian magnetosphere : evidence for a near - jupiter neutral line .
29 , 421 . ,
j. , krupp , n. , lagg , a. , wilken , b. , livi , s. , williams , d.  j. , apr . 1998 .
quasi - periodic modulations of the jovian magnetotail .
25 , 12531256 . ,
g. , may 1993 .
observable implications of tearing - mode instability in jupiter s nightside magnetosphere .
space sci .
41 , 357361 .
, q .- g . , fritz , t.  a. , pu , z.  y. , fu , s.  y. , baker , d.  n. , zhang , h. , lui , a.  t. , vogiatzis , i. , glassmeier , k .- h . , korth , a. , daly , p.  w. , balogh , a. , reme , h. , sep .
cluster observations of earthward flowing plasmoid in the tail .
31 , l18803 .
lp1.5cmlp1.5cmp2cmp4.5 cm time interval , year , doy , ut&radial distance , @xmath0&lt&duration , min & association with the reconnection events from @xcite&characteristics +   +   + 1996 264 19151955&88&0158&40 & y & protons @xmath36@xmath37 , electrons assymetric + 1996 264 20552143&88&0158&48 & y & protons , electrons @xmath36 , not clear case + 1996 270 23218271 0020&103&0230&62 & n & protons , electrons @xmath38@xmath39 , not clear case + 1996 271 09451022&0230&103&37 & n&protons @xmath38 , electrons bi - directional + 1996 272 2335273 0011&106&0238&36 & y & protons , electrons @xmath38 + 1996 275 09451145&110&0250&120 & y & protons , electrons
@xmath38 + 1996 275 19312045&110&0250&74 & y & protons , electrons @xmath38 + 1996 277 23182357&112&0300&39 & n & protons , electrons @xmath38 + 1996 278 01250220&112&0300&55 & n & protons , electrons @xmath36 + 1996 280 16021730&113&0309&73 & n & protons , electrons from @xmath36 to @xmath38 , current sheet crossing + 1996 283 12201315&112&0330&50 & n & protons
@xmath36 , electrons bi - directional + 1996 283 20182117&112&0330&59 & y & protons , electrons @xmath36 + 1996 284 00290205&112&0330&91 & y & protons @xmath38 , electrons bi - directional + 1996 285 04150450&111&0328&35 & n & asymmetric @xmath38 protons and electrons + 1996 285 05250725&111&0328&120 & y & protons , electrons @xmath38 + 1996 285 14151510&111&0328&55 & y & protons , electrons
@xmath36 + 1997 079 02070229&84&0255&22 & n & asymmetric @xmath38 protons and electrons , not clear case +   +    lp1.5cmlp1.5cmp2cmp4.5 cm time interval , year , doy , ut&radial distance , @xmath0&lt&duration , min & association with the reconnection events from @xcite&characteristics +   +   + 1997 152 07030740&100&0120&37 & n & protons @xmath36 , electrons bi - directional + 1997 153 06200700&100&0120&40 & y & protons , electrons @xmath36 + 1997 158 09000922&97.5&0143&22 & y & protons @xmath38 , electrons assymetric + 1997 161 12001300&94&0155&60 & y & protons @xmath38 , electrons assymetric + 1997 166 20252115&79.5&0230&50 & y&protons @xmath36 , electrons assymetric + 1997 166 21552227&79.5&0230&32 & n&asymmetric @xmath36 protons and electrons +   + 1996 262 15251629&79&0140&64 & n & protons @xmath38 + 1996 271 02330345&103&0230&72 & y & protons @xmath36 + 1996 273 03500430&106&0238&35 & n & protons @xmath38 + 1996 275 17191841&110&0250&82 & y & protons @xmath38 + 1996 275 22252338&110&0250&73 & n & protons
@xmath38 , not clear case + 1997 161 18321920&94&0155&48 & n & protons @xmath38 + 1997 168 07200742&75&0240&22 & n & protons @xmath36 +   +      ) ; ( second panel ) first order ion directional flow anisotropies in the radial ( positive is outward ) and corotational direction ; ( third panel ) the magnetic field components in siii coordinates and ( fourth panel ) its magnitude .
the vertical dashed lines denote the field - aligned beams and the bursty bulk flows.,width=453 ]


among the extensive literature on long - range dependence , relatively few publications are devoted to cyclical long - memory processes or long - range dependent random fields .
however , models with singularities at non - zero frequencies are of great importance in applications . for example , many time series show cyclical / seasonal evolutions .
singularities at non - zero frequencies produces peaks in the spectral density whose locations define periods of the cycles .
a survey of some recent asymptotic results for cyclical long - range dependent random processes and fields can be found in @xcite and @xcite .    in image analysis
popular isotropic spatial processes with singularities of the spectral density at non - zero frequencies are wave , @xmath0-bessel , and gegenbauer models .
@xcite investigated probabilistic properties of spatial gegenbauer models .
a realization of the gegenbauer random field on @xmath1 grid is shown in figure  [ fig1 ] .
[ fig1 ]    this article studies minimum contrast estimators ( mces ) of parameters of the gegenbauer random fields .
the mce methodology has been widely applied in different statistical frameworks ( see , for example , @xcite ; @xcite ) .
one of the first works which used a mce methodology for the parameter estimation of spectral densities of stationary processes was the paper by @xcite .
@xcite introduced a class of mces for random fields . @xcite derived consistency and asymptotic normality of a class of mces for stationary processes within the class of fractional riesz - bessel motion ( see @xcite ) .
results based on the second and third - order cumulant spectra were given by @xcite .
they also provided asymptotic properties of second and third - order sample spectral functionals .
these properties are of independent interest , since they can be applied to study the limiting properties of nonparametric estimators of processes with short or long - range dependence .
@xcite applied the minimum contrast parameter estimation to approximate the drift parameter of the ornstein - uhlenbeck process , when the corresponding stochastic differential equation is driven by the fractional brownian motion with a specific hurst index .
a burgeoning literature on spatio - temporal estimation has emerged in recent decades ( see @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , among others ) .
one of the most popular estimation tools applied was the maximum likelihood estimation method  ( mle ) .
@xcite addressed the problem of parameter estimation of fractionally integrated processes with seasonal components . in order to estimate the fractional parameters , they propose several log - periodogram regression estimators with different bandwidths selected around and/or between the seasonal frequencies .
the same methodology was used by @xcite for fractionally differenced autoregressive - moving average processes in the stationary time series context .
several contributions have also been made for mle of long memory spatial processes ( see , for example , @xcite ) . for two - dimensional spatial data the paper by @xcite introduced a spatial unilateral first - order autoregressive moving average ( arma ) model . to implement mle they provided a proper treatment to border cell values with a substantial effect in estimation of parameters .
@xcite addressed the problem of the least - squares estimation of autoregressive fractionally integrated moving - average ( farima ) processes with long - memory .
@xcite investigated asymptotic properties of least - squares estimators in regression models for two - dimensional random fields .
maximization of the whittle likelihood has been also considered in the recent literature on the mce ( see for example , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite ) .
@xcite gave a continuous version of the whittle contrast functional supplied with a specific weight function for the estimation of continuous - parameter stochastic processes , deriving the consistency and asymptotic normality of such estimators .
@xcite demonstrated that the whittle maximum likelihood estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal for stationary seasonal autoregressive fractionally integrated moving - average ( sarfima ) processes .
parameter estimation of stationary gegenbauer random processes was considered by numerous authors , see , for example , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite , @xcite .
@xcite used the generating function of the gegenbauer polynomials to develop long memory gegenbauer autoregressive moving - average ( garma ) models that generalize the farima process .
garma models were estimated by applying the mle methodology .
@xcite also applied this methodology with slight modifications based on the conditional sum of squares method .
@xcite extended these results to the two - parameter context within the garma process class .
@xcite introduced a @xmath2-factor extension of the garma model that allowed to associate the long - memory behavior with each one of the @xmath2 gegenbauer frequencies involved .
in this article we restrict our consideration to the estimation of long - range dependence parameters .
it is motivated in part by cyclic processes , for which pole locations are known .
also in some applications the spectral density singularity location can be estimated in advance .
various methods , including semiparametric , wavelet , and pseudo - maximum likelihood techniques , of the estimation of a singularity location were discussed by , for example , @xcite , @xcite , and @xcite .
this paper introduces and studies the mce of parameters of spatial gegenbauer processes .
specifically , analogous of continuous - space results by @xcite are formulated for random fields defined on integer grids .
the consistency and asymptotic normality of the mce are obtained using a spatial discrete version of the ibragimov contrast function .
the article develops a methodology to practically verify general theoretical assumptions for consistency and asymptotic normality of mces for specific models .
the results provide a rigorous platform to conduct model selection and statistical inference .
the outline of the article is the following . in section 2 ,
we start by introducing the main notations of the paper .
some fundamental definitions and the main results of this article , theorem 1 and 2 , are given in  3 .
section 4 consists of the proofs of the main results .
section 5 presents simulation studies which support the theoretical findings .
the appendix provides auxiliary materials that specify for our case the conditions that ensure the consistency and asymptotic normality of the mce based on the ibragimov contrast function formulated in @xcite .    in what follows
we use the symbol @xmath3 to denote constants which are not important for our discussion .
moreover , the same symbol @xmath3 may be used for different constants appearing in the same proof .
all calculations in the article were performed using the software _
r _ version  3.0.2 and _ maple 16 , _ maplesoft .
this section introduces some of the main definitions of the gegenbauer random fields given in @xcite ( see also , @xcite , @xcite , and @xcite , for the temporal case ) .
let @xmath4 @xmath5 be a random field defined on the grid lattice @xmath6 consider the fractional difference operator @xmath7 defined by @xmath8^{d},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath9 is the backward - shift operator ,
@xmath10 i.e. @xmath11 @xmath12 and @xmath13 assume that @xmath14 satisfies the following state equation @xmath15 where @xmath16 @xmath17 is given by equation ( [ fog ] ) , with @xmath18 @xmath17 denoting the backward - shift operator for each spatial coordinate , i.e. @xmath19 , and @xmath20 here , @xmath21 @xmath22 is a zero - mean white noise field with the common variance @xmath23=\sigma^{2}_{\varepsilon}.$ ] the random field @xmath14 is called a spatial gegenbauer white noise in @xcite .    by equation ( [ eqgegenbauer ] )
the gegenbauer random field @xmath14 can be defined in terms of the inverse of the operator @xmath24 expanded in a gegenbauer polynomial series as follows @xmath25 where @xmath26 @xmath17 and @xmath27 is the gegenbauer polynomial given by @xmath28 } ( -1)^{k } \frac{(2u)^{n-2k}\gamma(d - k+n)}{k!(n-2k)!\gamma(d)}.\ ] ] the generating function for the gegenbauer polynomials is given by @xmath29 which explains the expansion of the inverse operator in ( [ gegenb ] ) .
in general , a random field @xmath14 is called invertible if the white noise @xmath30 @xmath22 can be expressed as the convergent sum @xmath31 where @xmath32    the gegenbauer random field has the following property , see @xcite .
[ proposition ] if @xmath33 and @xmath34 @xmath17 then @xmath14 is a stationary invertible long range dependent random field .
the spectral density of a stationary gegenbauer random field is given by @xcite , and @xcite , for the one - parameter case , and @xcite , for the two - parameter case : @xmath35 where @xmath36 @xmath37 , and @xmath38 @xmath39 using the spectral density function ( [ spectral_density ] ) , one can compute the auto - covariance function of @xmath14 as follows : @xmath40^{\frac{1}{2}-2d_{1 } }      \left [ p_{j_{i}-\frac{1}{2}}^{2d_{i}-\frac{1}{2 } } ( u_{i } ) + ( -1)^{j_{i } } p_{j_{i}-\frac{1}{2}}^{2d_{i}-\frac{1}{2 } } ( -u_{i } ) \right],\ ] ] where @xmath41 is the associated legendre function of the first kind , consult  8 in @xcite .    from @xcite , @xcite and @xcite , the following asymptotic approximation of the autocovariance function
can be obtained @xmath42 .
\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the random field @xmath14 is long range dependent as its auto - covariance function satisfies the condition @xmath43 a detailed discussion on relations between local specifications of spectral functions and the tail behaviour of auto - covariance functions of long range dependent random fields can be found in @xcite .
figure  [ fig2 ] gives an example of the spectral density and the auto - covariance function of the gegenbauer random field for the values of the parameters @xmath44 @xmath45 @xmath46 and @xmath47     and @xmath48,width=226 ]     and @xmath48,width=226 ]
very detailed discussions about estimation of parameters of seasonal / cyclical long memory time series were given in @xcite,@xcite , @xcite , and references therein .
it was shown that the case of spectral singularities outside the origin is much more difficult comparing to the situation of a spectral pole at 0 .
in particular , estimators of parameters @xmath49 and @xmath50 have different rates of convergence and their joint distributions are still unknown under general conditions .
@xcite pointed out that , in practice , parameter estimation of seasonal / cyclical long memory data is done in two steps .
the first step consists in estimation of singularity locations , which does not represent a difficult issue .
then , the obtained values of location parameters are used in estimators of the long memory parameters .
it has been shown that this 2-steps method provides quasi - similar results to simultaneous procedures .
similarly , the results of this paper may also be used in a hierarchical modeling framework .
namely , locations of the singularities can be included in the first level of the hierarchical procedure .
then , on the second step of the hierarchical procedure , the long - range dependence parameters can be estimated by the mce method , conditioning on the locations obtained on the first step .
it also allows to construct a suitable weight function before applying the mce methodology .
therefore , in this paper we only concentrate our attention on long - range dependence parameters .
suppose that the conditions imposed in proposition  [ proposition ] to ensure stationarity , invertibility and long - range dependence hold .
assume the value of the parameter @xmath51 is known a priori or was estimated on step 1 .
then @xmath52 is the vector of parameters to estimate of the gegenbauer random field defined by equation  ( [ eqgegenbauer ] ) ( see also equation  ( [ spectral_density ] ) for the corresponding spectral density ) .
let @xmath4 @xmath53 be a part of a realization of the gegenbauer random field .
let @xmath54 , @xmath55^{2}$ ] , be a nonnegative function .
suppose the condition * a3 * in the appendix holds .
we define @xmath56^{2 } }       f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] and consider the factorization @xmath57 for all @xmath58 the function @xmath59 has the following property @xmath60^{2 } }        \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \ , \
, d\boldsymbol{\lambda } = 1.\ ] ]    let @xmath61 be a non - random real - valued function , usually referred as the _ contrast function _ , given  by @xmath62^{2 } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta_{0 } } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \log \frac{\psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta_{0 } } ) } { \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }   \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\ ] ] and let the _ contrast field _ be @xmath63^{2 } }       f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta_{0 } } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } )       \log \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,\
, d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\ ] ] where @xmath64 is the true parameter value . in
what follows , @xmath65 denotes the probability distribution with the density function @xmath66    the empirical version @xmath67 @xmath68 @xmath69 is defined by @xmath70^{2 } }       i_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \log\psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\ ] ] where @xmath71 is the periodogram of the observations @xmath4 @xmath53 of the gegenbauer random field , that is , @xmath72    the mce is defined by the empirical contrast field @xmath73 and the contrast function @xmath61 being @xmath74 and having a unique minimum at @xmath75    in particular , we choose @xmath76^{2},\ ] ] where @xmath77 @xmath17 @xmath78 is a positive function with continuous second order derivatives on @xmath79^{2}.$ ]    notice that by ( [ weightfunction ] ) the weight function @xmath54 is nonnegative and symmetric about @xmath80 due to the boundedness of @xmath54 the product @xmath81 is integrable .
thus , the choice of @xmath54 fulfils condition  * a3 * in the appendix .
the developed methodology is readily adjustable to other classes of weight functions .
theorems  [ theorem_1 ] and [ theorem_2 ] give consistency and asymptotic normality results for the mce .
[ theorem_1 ] let @xmath82 be a stationary gegenbauer random field which spectral density satisfies equation ( [ spectral_density ] ) .
if @xmath73 is the empirical contrast field defined by equation  ( [ equation_ut ] ) , then    * @xmath83 satisfies the conditions * a1-a6 * in the appendix ; * the minimum contrast estimator @xmath84 is a consistent estimator of the parameter vector @xmath85 that is , there is a convergence in @xmath65 probability : @xmath86 * @xmath87 where the variance estimator @xmath88 is given by @xmath89 ^ 2 } i_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}.\ ] ]    notice that assumption * a4 * is not required to prove the last two statements in theorem  [ theorem_1 ] , but it will be used in the proof of theorem  [ theorem_2 ] .    to formulate theorem  [ theorem_2 ]
we introduce the following notations .
the unbiased estimator of the correlation function @xmath90 @xmath91 of the gegenbauer random field @xmath83 is @xmath92 note that all indices of the random field in the sum above are within the set @xmath93 where the observations are available .
the unbiased periodogram is given by @xmath94 and the corresponding empirical _
contrast field _
is @xmath95 ^ 2 }       i_{t}^{*}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \log \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}.\ ] ] we also define @xmath96 ^ 2 } i_{t}^{*}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\,\ ,   d\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ ] and the associated adjusted mce @xmath97    [ theorem_2 ] if @xmath82 is a stationary gegenbauer random field which spectral density satisfies equation ( [ spectral_density ] ) with @xmath98 then    * @xmath83 satisfies the conditions * a1-a9 * in the appendix ; * the adjusted mce defined by ( [ equation_theta_estimado2 ] ) is asymptotically normal .
that is , @xmath99 where the entries of the matrices @xmath100 and @xmath101 are @xmath102^{2 } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \theta_{i}\partial \theta_{j } } \log \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,\ ,
d\boldsymbol{\lambda}=\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \displaystyle\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2 } } w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \nonumber \\ & & \times\left [ \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \theta_{i}\partial \theta_{j } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \frac{1}{\psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }    \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )    \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } , \label{sij}\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath103^{2 } } f^{2}(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) w^{2}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \log \left(\psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )
\right ) \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \log \left(\psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ) \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } \nonumber \\ & = &   8\pi^{2 } \sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta } )
\displaystyle\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2 } } w^{2}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )   \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )   \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}. \label{aij}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    to avoid the edge effect @xcite employed the modified periodogram approach suggested by @xcite .
we use their assumptions in theorem  [ theorem_2 ] . note that some authors pointed few problems in using @xmath104
see @xcite , @xcite , and references therein .
various other modifications , for example , typed variograms , smoothed variograms , kernel estimators , to reduce the edge effect have been proposed .
it would be interesting to prove analogous of the results by @xcite and theorem  [ theorem_2 ] for these modifications , too .
however , it is beyond the scope of this paper .
moreover , it remains as an open problem whether the edge - effect modification is essential for the asymptotic normality or not , see @xcite .
to prove the theorems we will use the following differentiability lemma .    [
* theorem 11.5)][lem1 ] let @xmath105 be a measurable space , @xmath106 and @xmath107 be an open set .
suppose the function @xmath108 satisfies the following conditions :    1 .   for all
@xmath109 @xmath110 2 .   for almost all
@xmath111 the derivative @xmath112 exists for all @xmath113 3 .
there is an integrable function @xmath114 such that @xmath115 for almost all @xmath116    then there exists @xmath117    [ lem2 ] the function @xmath118 is bounded and separated from zero on @xmath119 moreover , its first and second order derivatives are bounded on @xmath120 and can be computed by @xmath121^{2 } } w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial          \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\nonumber\\ & = & -2\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2 } }          \log\left|2\cos\lambda_{i}-2u_{i}\right|\,w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } )   f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath122^{2 } }                w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial                    \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}= 4\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2 } }                            \log\left|2\cos\lambda_{i}-2u_{i}\right|\nonumber\\ & & \times \log\left|2\cos\lambda_{j}-2u_{j}\right|\,w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } )   f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\label{d2theta }     \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath123    by the choice ( [ weightfunction ] ) of the weight function we obtain @xmath124^{2}\times \theta}f(\boldsymbol{\lambda } , \boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) < + \infty\ ] ] and @xmath125^{2}}\sup_{\theta\in \theta}f(\boldsymbol{\lambda } , \boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) d\boldsymbol{\lambda } \leq 4\pi^{2 } \sup_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2}\times \theta}f(\boldsymbol{\lambda } , \boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) < + \infty.\ ] ] hence , @xmath118 is bounded .
note that @xmath126^{2}\times \theta}\left\{\left|2\cos\lambda_{1}-2u_{1}\right|\right\}^{2d_{1 } } \ ,      \left\{\left|2\cos\lambda_{2}-2u_{2}\right|\right\}^{2d_{2}}<+\infty .
$ ] also , by the choice of the weight function , there exists @xmath127 and a set @xmath128^{2}$ ] of non - zero lebesgue measure such that @xmath129 for all @xmath130 therefore , @xmath131^{2}}f(\boldsymbol{\lambda } , \boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) d\boldsymbol{\lambda } \nonumber\\ & \geq \frac{\delta\ , \boldsymbol{\lambda } ( a_0)}{\sup_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2}\times \theta}\left\{\left|2\cos\lambda_{1}-2u_{1}\right|\right\}^{2d_{1 } } \ ,      \left\{\left|2\cos\lambda_{2}-2u_{2}\right|\right\}^{2d_{2}}}>0,\nonumber    \end{aligned}\ ] ] which means that @xmath118 is separated from zero on @xmath119    now , to study @xmath132 we compute @xmath133 @xmath134 @xmath135^{-2d_{i } } \nonumber\\          & \quad\times\left[2(\cos\lambda_{j}-u_{j } ) \right]^{-2d_{j } } = -2\log\left|2\cos\lambda_{i}-2u_{i}\right| f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) , \label{deriv_f_d }          \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath136 and @xmath137    using ( [ weightfunction ] ) and ( [ deriv_f_d ] ) we conclude that @xmath138^{2}\times \theta}\left|w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial    \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right|<+\infty.\ ] ] thus , by ( [ eq_sigma_factorization ] ) and lemma  [ lem1 ] there exists @xmath139^{2 } } w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial          \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] and @xmath140^{2}\times \theta}\left|w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial      \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right|<+\infty.\ ] ]    it is not difficult to find @xmath141 by ( [ deriv_f_d ] ) , for @xmath142 @xmath143 the second derivatives of @xmath144 are given by @xmath145 @xmath146    it follows from ( [ eqsdds3 ] ) , ( [ eqsdds4 ] ) , and ( [ weightfunction ] ) that @xmath147^{2}\times \theta}\left|w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial          \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right|<+\infty,\quad i , j=1,2.\ ] ] finally , by ( [ dtheta ] ) and lemma  [ lem1 ] there exists @xmath148^{2 } }        w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial            \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] and @xmath149^{2}\times \theta}\left|w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial                \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right|<+\infty.\vspace{-3mm}\ ] ] @xmath150    _ of theorem _ [ theorem_1 ] .
we will prove that the conditions * a1-a6 * in the appendix are satisfied .
therefore , we will be able to apply theorem 3 by @xcite and obtain the statement of theorem  [ theorem_1 ] .
the condition * a1 * holds , since @xmath151 belongs to the parameter space @xmath152 which is an interior of the compact set @xmath153^{2}$ ] .
it follows from representation ( [ spectral_density ] ) of the spectral density that @xmath154 for @xmath155 thus , the condition * a2 * is satisfied .
the class of non - negative weight functions @xmath54 defined by ( [ weightfunction ] ) consists of symmetric functions .
note that @xmath156 when @xmath157 thus , by ( [ weightfunction ] ) and representation ( [ spectral_density ] ) of the spectral density we get @xmath158^{2})$ ] for all @xmath85    to verify * a4 * , that is , to prove @xmath159^{2 } }       \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } =              \displaystyle\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2 } } \nabla_{\boldsymbol{\theta } }       \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } =       0,\ ] ] we find @xmath160}_{s_{1}(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }   - \underbrace{\frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})}{\sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta})}\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})}_{s_{2}(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})}\ ] ] and apply lemma 1 .
the same symbol @xmath3 is used for different nonessential constants appearing in the calculations below .    by ( [ spectral_density ] ) and the choice of the weight function we obtain @xmath161^{2}\times \theta}\big|\log\left|2\cos\lambda_{i}-2u_{i}\right|\big|\,f(\boldsymbol{\lambda } , \boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) < + \infty.\ ] ]    therefore , by equation ( [ deriv_f_d ] ) and lemma  [ lem2 ] : @xmath162^{2}).\ ] ]    now , by ( [ fw1 ] ) , ( [ s2 ] ) and lemma  [ lem2 ] we can estimate @xmath163 as @xmath164 f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } { \sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta})}\right|\leq c\ ,   \frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } { \min_{\theta}\sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta})}\le c.\ ] ]    finally , * a4 * follows from ( [ s1up ] ) , ( [ s2up ] ) , and lemma  [ lem1 ] with @xmath165    note that @xmath166^{2})\cap l_{2}([-\pi,\pi]^{2})= l_{2}([-\pi,\pi]^{2}).$ ] to verify the condition * a5 * for the weight function @xmath167 we have to show that @xmath168 @xmath169^{2}),$ ] for all @xmath170 by ( [ spectral_density ] ) and ( [ weightfunction ] ) the product @xmath171 @xmath172 is bounded for all @xmath173 except @xmath174 let @xmath175 then , for @xmath176 @xmath134 @xmath177^{2}\leq c\prod_{i=1}^{2}|{\lambda_i}\pm { \nu_i}|^{2a_i-4\tilde{d}_i}\log|\lambda_{i}\pm \nu_{i}|\in   l_{1}([-\pi,\pi]^{2}).\ ] ] therefore , combining the above results we conclude that * a5 * holds .
to verify the condition * a6 * we use the following function @xmath178 @xmath179 note that @xmath180 when @xmath157 thus , by the choice of @xmath181 and properties of @xmath182 the function @xmath183 is uniformly continuous on @xmath79^{2}\times \theta .$ ]    also , it holds @xmath184^{2}).\ ] ]    since the conditions * a1 * -*a6 * are satisfied theorem 1 follows from theorem 3 in @xcite.@xmath185    _ of theorem _ 2 . to prove the asymptotic normality of the mce in theorem  [ theorem_2 ] we will show that the conditions * a7 * -*a9 * of the appendix hold .
we begin by proving the condition * a7*. first , to verify the twice differentiability of the function @xmath186 on @xmath120 we formally compute the second - order derivatives of @xmath187 @xmath188   \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) -   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ]   f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})}{\sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }   \right ] \nonumber\\   & = & \frac{1}{\sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left\ {    \left[\frac{\partial^{2 } } { \partial \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } }    f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right ]   \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) +   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ]   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta}_{i } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right ] \right\ } \nonumber\\ & -&\frac{1}{\sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left\ {   \left[\frac{\partial^{2 } } { \partial \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } }   \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})-   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ]   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right ]   \right\}\nonumber \\
& -&\frac{1}{\sigma^{8}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left\ { \frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \left ( \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right]\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } )   - \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ) \right\}.\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    note that in lemma  [ lem2 ] we proved that the derivatives @xmath189
@xmath190 @xmath191 and @xmath192 exist .
hence , by the above computations and lemma  [ lem2 ] the function @xmath193 is twice differentiable on @xmath119    in addition , by estimates ( [ dsup ] ) , ( [ df2 ] ) , ( [ d2sigma ] ) , lemma  [ lem2 ] , and the above representation for @xmath194 the product @xmath195 is bounded on @xmath79^{2}\times \theta.$ ] hence , for @xmath196 @xmath197 @xmath198^{2})\cap                  l_{2}([-\pi,\pi]^{2}).\ ] ]    to prove part 2 of the condition * a7 * , we first note that by ( [ equation_spectraldensity ] ) and ( [ deriv_f_d ] ) : @xmath199 by lemma  [ lem2 ] the second term is bounded .
hence , it follows from ( [ fw1 ] ) and ( [ fw2 ] ) that the product @xmath200 is bounded on @xmath79^{2}\times \theta,$ ] that implies @xmath201^{2}),\quad k\geq 1,\ \   i=1,2 ,                  \ \ \boldsymbol{\theta } \in \theta .\ ] ]    to verify the condition * a8 * we first check the positive definiteness of the matrices @xmath202 and @xmath203    the entries of @xmath202 can be rewritten as @xmath204^{2}}\psi_w(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \theta_{i}\partial \theta_{j}}\log \psi_w(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\ ] ] where @xmath205    by ( [ spectral_density ] ) , ( [ weightfunction ] ) , and lemma  [ lem2 ] the function @xmath206 is integrable , i.e. there is a constant @xmath3 such that @xmath207 is a density .
hence , @xmath208 where @xmath209 is the fisher information matrix of the random vector @xmath210 with the density @xmath211^{2}}\psi_w(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) d\boldsymbol{\lambda}.$ ] therefore , @xmath202 is non - negative definite .
note that @xmath212 where @xmath213 the random variables @xmath214 and @xmath215 are not a.s .
linearly related which implies positive definiteness of @xmath202 .
the entries of @xmath216 can be rewritten as @xmath217^{2 } } w^{2}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )   \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )   \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } = c\sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta})\,e\left(q_iq_j\right ) , \ ] ] where @xmath218 and the random vector @xmath219 has the density @xmath220^{2 } } w^{2}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } )   \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}}.$ ]    as @xmath221 is a non - negative definite matrix , @xmath216 is non - negative definite too .
moreover , it is positive definite , because the random variables @xmath222 and @xmath223 are not a.s .
linearly related .
now we compute elements of the matrix @xmath224 by ( [ sij ] ) @xmath225^{2}}w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \left [ \frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \theta_{i}\partial \theta_{j } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \frac{1}{\psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }    \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )    \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right]d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\nonumber\\ & = & \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2}}\left(w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } \left [ \frac {   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right ]   \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) -   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }   { \sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }   \right]\right.\nonumber\\ & & - \frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})}{f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\sigma^{6}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }   \left ( \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right)\nonumber\\ & & \left .
\times \left ( \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right)\right)d\boldsymbol{\lambda }   \nonumber   \end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath226^{2}}\left(\frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})}{\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left (    \left[\frac{\partial^{2 } } { \partial \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } }    f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right ]   \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) +   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ]   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta}_{i } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right ] \right)\right .
\nonumber\\ & &   -\frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})}{\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left (   \left[\frac{\partial^{2 } } { \partial \theta_{j}\partial \theta_{i } }    \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})-   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ]   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right ]   \right)\nonumber \\ & &   -2\frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})}{\sigma^{6}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left ( \frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \left ( \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right]\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ) \right)\nonumber \\ & & - \frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})}{\sigma^{4}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left(\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i}}\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right )   \nonumber\\ & & \times \left(\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right)d\boldsymbol{\lambda}. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] by ( [ eq_sigma_factorization ] ) , ( [ dtheta ] ) , ( [ d2theta ] ) , and ( [ deriv_f_d ] ) we obtain @xmath227^{2}}\frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) } { \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ]   \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial \theta}_{i } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right]d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] @xmath228^{2}}\frac{w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})}{f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) }   \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } }   f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ]   \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right]d\boldsymbol{\lambda}= \frac{3}{\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) } \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial    \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \left[\frac{\partial } { \partial    \theta_{i } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right]\ ] ] @xmath229^{2 } } \log\left|2\cos\lambda_{i}-2u_{i}\right|\log\left|2\cos\lambda_{j}-2u_{j}\right|\ , w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})d\boldsymbol{\lambda}.\ ] ]    by ( [ aij ] ) the elements of the matrix @xmath216 are @xmath230^{2}}w^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda } )     \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } )    \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\nonumber\\ & = & 8\pi^2 \int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2}}w^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda } )   \left(\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i}}\sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right )   \nonumber\\ & & \times \left(\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) - \left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right ] f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\right)\,d\boldsymbol{\lambda}. \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] hence , by ( [ deriv_f_d ] ) we get @xmath231 where @xmath232^{2}}\log\left|2\cos\lambda_{i}-2u_{i}\right|\log\left|2\cos\lambda_{j}-2u_{j}\right|\ , w^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) f^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\vspace{-4mm}\ ] ] @xmath233\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2}}\log\left|2\cos\lambda_{i}-2u_{i}\right|\ , w^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) f^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})d\boldsymbol{\lambda } , \nonumber\\ s_3 & = & 8\pi^2\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right]\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{j } } \sigma^{2}(\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \right]\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2 } } w^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) f^2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})d\boldsymbol{\lambda}.\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the proof of the condition * a9 * is based on the approach in @xcite .
notice , that by ( [ weightfunction ] ) there exists a factorization @xmath234 of @xmath54 such that both @xmath235 and @xmath236 are bounded functions of  @xmath237 for example , one can select the function @xmath238 to be equal a product of @xmath239 and a positive smooth function on @xmath79^{2}.$ ] let us denote @xmath240 then , @xmath241 ^ 2 } ( ei^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})-f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0 ) ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \log \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } = t\displaystyle\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^2 } ( ei^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\ ] ] @xmath242 ^ 2 } ( ei^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda})-e\tilde{i}^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) ) \tilde{w}_2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] @xmath243 ^ 2 } ( e\tilde{i}^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})-\tilde{f}(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0 ) ) \tilde{w}_2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\ ] ] where @xmath244 denotes the unbiased periodogram of the random field with the spectral density  @xmath245    notice that @xmath246 is bounded . hence , by the first statement of proposition  2 in @xcite the last integral in ( [ integ ] ) is @xmath247 and the second term in ( [ integ ] ) vanishes when @xmath248 therefore , to prove the condition * a9 * , it is enough to show that the first term in ( [ integ ] ) vanishes too .
let @xmath249 denote the auto - covariance function of the random field with the spectral density  @xmath245 by multidimensional parseval s theorem , see @xcite , we get @xmath250 ^ 2 } ( ei^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda})-e\tilde{i}^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) ) \tilde{w}_2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] @xmath251 ^ 2 } \bigl(w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \sum_{t_{1}=1-t}^{t-1}\sum_{t_{2}=1-t}^{t-1 } e^{- i(\lambda_{1}t_{1}+\lambda_{2}t_{2 } ) } { \gamma}(\boldsymbol{t},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0)\ ] ] @xmath252 @xmath253 ^ 2 } \bigl(w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \sum_{(t_{1},t_{2})\in \mathbb{z}^2 } e^{- i(\lambda_{1}t_{1}+\lambda_{2}t_{2 } ) } { \gamma}(\boldsymbol{t},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0)i_{[1-t , t-1]^2}(t_{1},t_{2})\]]@xmath254 ^ 2}(t_{1},t_{2})\bigr)\tilde{w}_2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] @xmath255 ^ 2 } \bigl(w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\displaystyle\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^2 } { f}(\boldsymbol{x},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0)\phi_{t-1}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}-\boldsymbol{x})\,d\boldsymbol{x}\ ] ] @xmath228 ^ 2 } \tilde{f}(\boldsymbol{x},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0)\phi_{t-1}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}-\boldsymbol{x})\,d\boldsymbol{x}\bigr)\tilde{w}_2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda}\ ] ] @xmath256
^ 2 } \bigl(\displaystyle\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^2 } { f}(\boldsymbol{x}+\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0)\phi_{t-1}(\boldsymbol{x})(w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda})-w_1(\boldsymbol{\lambda}+\boldsymbol{x}))\,d\boldsymbol{x}\bigr)\tilde{w}_2(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta})\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda},\ ] ] where @xmath257 is the fejr kernel , @xmath258 ^ 2}(t_{1},t_{2})$ ] is the indicator function of the cube @xmath259
^ 2.$ ]    let @xmath260 ^ 2),$ ] i.e. @xmath261 then , one can refine the approach in theorems  2.1 and  2.2 by @xcite for the two - dimensional case with @xmath262 namely , let us split the inner integral in ( [ secint ] ) into two parts : the first integral is over the region @xmath263 and the second integral is over @xmath264\setminus a_{\alpha}.$ ]    for @xmath265 , by the choice of @xmath238 and @xmath266\setminus a_\alpha}\phi_{t-1}(\boldsymbol{x})\,d\boldsymbol{x}=\left(\frac{1}{{\pi(t-1)}}\int_{t^{-\alpha}}^\pi\left(\frac{\sin ( ( t-1)x_1/2)}{\sin ( x_1/2)}\right)^2 dx_1\right)^2\ ] ] @xmath267 the both above integrals are bounded by @xmath268 where @xmath269 when @xmath248 it implies that first term in ( [ integ ] ) vanishes and completes the proof of the condition * a9*.@xmath185
in this section we present some numerical results to confirm the theoretical findings .
figure  [ fig3a ] demonstrates a series of box plots to characterize the sample distribution of mces of the parameters @xmath270 @xmath17 as a function of @xmath271 to compute it monte carlo simulations of the gegenbauer field with 100 replications for each @xmath272 were performed . for the parameters @xmath44 @xmath45 @xmath46 @xmath273 and @xmath274 realizations of @xmath275
were simulated using the truncated sum @xmath276 in ( [ gegenb ] ) .
for example , a realization of the gegenbauer random field on a @xmath1 grid is shown in figure  [ fig1 ] .
we set the parameter values of the weight function in ( [ weightfunction ] ) to @xmath277 and @xmath278 the periodogram @xmath71 was computed and the minimizing argument @xmath279 of the functional @xmath73 was found numerically for each simulation .
figure  [ fig3a ] demonstrates that the sample distribution of @xmath279 converges to @xmath280 as @xmath281 increases .
the plot of the sample probabilities @xmath282 in figure  [ fig3b ] also confirms convergence in probability of @xmath279 to @xmath283    ]    ]    for each generated realization we also computed the value of @xmath88 using @xmath284 analogously to figures  [ fig3a ] ,  [ fig3b ] , plots in figures  [ fig4a ] ,  [ fig4b ] support convergence in probability of @xmath88 to @xmath285 when @xmath281 increases .
notice that by ( [ eq_sigma_factorization ] ) we get @xmath286 for the selected parameters .
the larger values of @xmath287 in figure  [ fig4b ] comparing to figure  [ fig3b ] are due to the difference in the scales for the parameters ( small values measured in decimals ) and variances ( large values measured in tens ) .    ]    ]    to verify the result of theorem  [ theorem_2 ] we used sample values @xmath288 which minimized the functional @xmath289 for each simulation . to avoid possible negative values
the modified periodogram @xmath290 was truncated at zero by the r program .
bearing in mind the edge effect and modified periodogram s correction , figures  [ fig5a ] ,  [ fig5b ] demonstrate that the results are close to the expected ones even for the relatively small @xmath291 the normal q - q plot of each component of @xmath292 in figures  [ fig5b ] matches with the theoretical normal distribution . to test the bivariate normality hypothesis about @xmath292 we used the shapiro - wilk , energy , and kurtosis tests of multivariate normality from the r packages mvnormtest , energy , and ics . in all the tests , p - values ( @xmath293 @xmath294 and @xmath295 ) confirmed that @xmath296 asymptotically follows a bivariate normal distribution .
simulations for other values of the parameters were run , with similar results .    ]    ]    hence , we conclude that the mces are consistent estimators and the distributions of @xmath296 converge to the bivariate normal law .
note that the simulation studies not only comply with the obtained results for @xmath98 but also indicate that the theoretical results may be extended to all possible values of @xmath297 in @xmath298
the estimation methodology based on the unbiased periodogram was introduced in @xcite , see also @xcite .
recently , the paper by @xcite and the references therein provided a detailed discussion on the topic .
it studied mainly the difficulties arising in the application of the methodology in high dimensions .
in particular , they investigated problems arising in relation to non - uniformly increasing domain asymptotics associated with different expansion rates of the studied domain in each spatial direction . in this paper , we considered the case @xmath299 and restricted out attention to the case of uniformly increasing domain asymptotics .
the case of non - uniformly increasing domain asymptotics is left for future investigations .
an extended version of the derived results can be obtained for more general formulations of the unbiased periodogram . in particular ,
different growing rates can be allowed for each spatial dimension in the definition of the sampling area .
for example , one can consider the following generalized version of the two - dimensional unbiased periodogram ( see , for example , @xcite ) @xmath300 where the functions @xmath301 @xmath302 satisfy some suitable conditions ( for example , @xmath303 @xmath304 and @xmath305 @xmath306 for @xmath17 and sufficiently large @xmath281 ) .    an important area for future explorations is to extend the results of @xcite and simultaneously estimate the locations of singularities and long - range dependence parameters using the mce methodology .
a feasible way to approach this problem would be relaxing the @xmath307-integrability assumptions in conditions * a5-a8 .
*    it also would be interesting to extend the methodology by @xcite to prove the condition * a9 * for all @xmath297 in @xmath298    note that our simulation results show that the proposed minimum contrast estimation methodology works in the case of uniformly increasing domain asymptotics .
* supplementary materials * the codes used for simulations in this paper are available from the site ` https://googledrive.com/host/ `    ` 0b7uxm8o_bnbxdg9znu9mdhfoquu / mce%20gegenbauer%20fields/ `    the authors are grateful for the referee s careful reading of the paper and many detailed comments and suggestions , which helped to improve the paper .
also , this work has been supported in part by projects mtm2012 - 32674 of the dgi , mec , and p09-fqm-5052 of the andalousian cice , spain .
a.olenko was partially supported by the 2013 ltu research grant .
the conditions for consistency and asymptotic normality of the mce for parameters of stationary fractional riesz - bessel type random fields given in @xcite are specified below for random fields on @xmath6    let @xmath308 be a real - valued measurable stationary gaussian random field with zero mean and a spectral density @xmath309 where @xmath310^{2},$ ] @xmath69 and @xmath120 is a compact set .
assume that @xmath311 where @xmath151 is the true value of the parameter vector @xmath85          the derivatives @xmath318 exist and it is legitimate to differentiate under the integral sign in equation ( [ equation_psi ] ) , i.e. @xmath159^{2 } }       \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } =              \displaystyle\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^{2 } } \nabla_{\boldsymbol{\theta } }       \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } = 0 . \nonumber\ ] ]                the spectral density @xmath309 the weight function @xmath331 and the function @xmath332 are such that for all @xmath333 and @xmath334 @xmath241 ^ 2 } ( ei^{*}_{t}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})-f(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta}_0 ) ) w(\boldsymbol{\lambda } ) \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta_{i } } \log \psi(\boldsymbol{\lambda},\boldsymbol{\theta } ) \,\ , d\boldsymbol{\lambda } \longrightarrow 0 , \quad\text{as } \quad t\longrightarrow \infty.\ ] ]                                      ferrara l , gugan d ( 2001 ) comparison of parameter estimation methods in cyclical long memory time series . in : junis c ,
moody j , timmermann a ( eds . ) development in forecast combination and portfolio choice , chapter  8 , wiley , new york