MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090861228 · doi:10.1080/10420150903516650

Plasma flow measurements in improved modes on STOR-M and CASTOR tokamaks

2010· article· en· W2090861228 on OpenAlexaffabout
G. S. Germaine, C. Xiao, Akira Hirose

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation effects and defects in solids · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTokamakBiasingPlasmaAtomic physicsOhmic contactMicroturbulenceToroidElectrodeChemistryMaterials sciencePhysicsVoltageNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Gundestrup probe, a Mach probe array, is used to measure both the parallel and perpendicular flow velocities in the Saskatchewan Torus-Modified (STOR-M) tokamak during several discharge conditions. It is observed that during ohmic discharges there is no velocity shear and the direction of the parallel flow is independent of the direction of the toroidal magnetic field. During H-mode induced by a turbulent heating current pulse, a region of strong velocity shear develops in the plasma edge and an edge transport barrier develops. This results in a short period of improved particle and energy confinement with reduced fluctuation amplitudes. During electrode biasing experiments, a stainless steel biasing electrode is inserted into the plasma up to r=82 mm and biased to+500 V relative to the vacuum chamber. It is observed that the particle confinement improves during the biasing phase while the energy confinement is degraded. A region of weak shear in the poloidal flow is observed in the plasma scrape-off layer (SOL). The results from STOR-M are compared with results from data taken in the Czech Academy of Sciences Torus (CASTOR) tokamak during both ohmic discharges and discharges with electrode biasing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation effects and defects in solidsSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207