MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111835145 · doi:10.1002/ctpp.201210045

PIC Simulation Study of Heat Transport Kinetic Factors in Scrape‐Off Layer Plasmas

2012· article· en· W2111835145 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Froese, T. Takizuka, M. Yagi

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to Plasma Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsGeneral Fusion (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinetic energyElectronDivertorHeat fluxPopulationElectron temperatureTokamakPhysicsPlasmaDistribution functionComputational physicsAtomic physicsMaterials scienceMechanicsThermodynamicsHeat transferClassical mechanicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An accurate calculation of heat load on the divertor plates in a tokamak must take into account kinetic effects, present when the electron velocity distribution function (EVDF) in the plasma column departs from a thermal distribution. In this work PARASOL‐1D, a particle‐in‐cell code with a Monte‐Carlo binary collision model, is used to find and explain the electron heat flux‐limiting factor α e and the heat transmission coefficient (HTC) γ e in the complex SOL. We develop and test two simple models for these kinetic factors that take as input the temperature of the SOL and the temperature of the electrons striking the divertor plates. Both models assume a piecewise EVDF, with a symmetric bulk electron population and a high‐energy tail of electrons moving only in the direction of the nearest diverter plate. The model EVDF are fit to the simulation‐derived EVDF by allowing the variables for the densities and temperatures in the bulk and tail to vary independently. The block model, which assumes a bulk population of infinite parallel temperature in the bulk, is found to reproduce the kinetic factors for a wide range of conditions in the complex SOL much better than both the classical and Gaussian models (© 2012 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContributions to Plasma PhysicsSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207