Locked modes in two reversed-field pinch devices of different size and shell system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The behavior of locked modes in two reversed-field pinch devices, the Toroidal Pinch Experiment (TPE-RX) [Y. Yagi et al., Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 41, 2552 (1999)] and Extrap T2 [J. R. Drake et al., in Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Research 1996, Montreal (International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 1996), Vol. 2, p. 193] is analyzed and compared. The main characteristics of the locked mode are qualitatively similar. The toroidal distribution of the mode locking shows that field errors play a role in both devices. The probability of phase locking is found to increase with increasing magnetic fluctuation levels in both machines. Furthermore, the probability of phase locking increases with plasma current in TPE-RX despite the fact that the magnetic fluctuation levels decrease. A comparison with computations using a theoretical model estimating the critical mode amplitude for locking [R. Fitzpatrick et al., Phys. Plasmas 6, 3878 (1999)] shows a good correlation with experimental results in TPE-RX. In Extrap T2, the magnetic fluctuations scale weakly with both plasma current and electron densities. This is also reflected in the weak scaling of the magnetic fluctuation levels with the Lundquist number (∼S−0.06). In TPE-RX, the corresponding scaling is ∼S−0.18.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".