Numerical magnetohydrodynamic simulations of expanding flux ropes: Influence of boundary driving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The expansion dynamics of a magnetized, current-carrying plasma arch is studied by means of time-dependent ideal MHD simulations. Initial conditions model the setup used in recent laboratory experiments that in turn simulate coronal loops [J. Tenfelde et al., Phys. Plasmas 19, 072513 (2012); E. V. Stenson and P. M. Bellan, Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 54, 124017 (2012)]. Boundary conditions of the electric field at the “lower” boundary, intersected by the arch, are chosen such that poloidal magnetic flux is injected into the domain, either localized at the arch footpoints themselves or halfway between them. These conditions are motivated by the tangential electric field expected to exist in the laboratory experiments due to the external circuit that drives the plasma current. The boundary driving is found to systematically enhance the expansion velocity of the plasma arch. While perturbations at the arch footpoints also deform its legs and create characteristic elongated segments, a perturbation between the footpoints tends to push the entire structure upwards, retaining an ellipsoidal shape.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".