We explore the sensitivity of the frequencies of low-degree solar p-modes to near-surface magnetic flux on different spatial scales and strengths, specifically to active regions with strong magnetic fields and ephemeral regions with weak magnetic fields. We also use model reconstructions from the literature to calculate average frequency offsets back to the end of the Maunder minimum. We find that the p-mode frequencies are at least three times less sensitive (at 95% confidence) to the ephemeral-region field than they are to the active-region field. Frequency shifts between activity cycle minima and maxima are controlled predominantly by the change of active region flux. Frequency shifts at cycle minima (with respect to a magnetically quiet Sun) are determined largely by the ephemeral flux, and are estimated to have been $0.1\,\rm \mu Hz$ or less over the last few minima. We conclude that at epochs of cycle minimum, frequency shifts due to near-surface magnetic activity are negligible compared to the offsets between observed and model frequencies that arise from inaccurate modelling of the near-surface layers (the so-called surface term). The implication is that this will be the case for other Sun-like stars with similar activity, which has implications for asteroseismic modelling of stars.

We have studied long-term variations of galactic cosmic ray (GCR) intensity in relation to the sunspot number (SSN) during the most recent solar cycles. This study analyses the time-lag between the GCR intensity and SSN, and hysteresis plots of the GCR count rate against SSN for solar activity cycles 20-23 to validate a methodology against previous results in the literature, before applying the method to provide a timely update on the behaviour of cycle 24. Cross-plots of SSN vs GCR show a clear difference between the odd-numbered and even-numbered cycles. Linear and elliptical models have been fit to the data with the linear fit and elliptical model proving the more suitable model for even-numbered and odd-numbered solar activity cycles respectively, in agreement with previous literature. Through the application of these methods for the 24th solar activity cycle, it has been shown that cycle 24 experienced a lag of 2-4 months and follows the trend of the preceding activity cycles albeit with a slightly longer lag than previous even-numbered cycles. It has been shown through the hysteresis analysis that the linear fit is a better representative model for cycle 24, as the ellipse model doesn't show a significant improvement, which is also in agreement with previous even-numbered cycles.