MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282563178 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1409.8519

Mixed semi-Lagrangian/finite difference methods for plasma simulations

2014· preprint· en· W2282563178 on OpenAlexaff
Francis Filbet, Chang Yang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonlinear systemPhysicsFinite difference methodPlasmaDomain (mathematical analysis)Finite differenceMathematical analysisPlane (geometry)Guiding centerTurbulencePhase (matter)Applied mathematicsStability (learning theory)MathematicsClassical mechanicsMechanicsComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an efficient algorithm for the long time behavior of plasma simulations. We will focus on 4D drift-kinetic model, where the plasma's motion occurs in the plane perpendicular to the magnetic field and can be governed by the 2D guiding-center model. Hermite WENO reconstructions, already proposed in \cite{YF15}, are applied for solving the Vlasov equation. Here we consider an arbitrary computational domain with an appropriate numerical method for the treatment of boundary conditions. Then we apply this algorithm for plasma turbulence simulations. We first solve the 2D guiding-center model in a D-shape domain and investigate the numerical stability of the steady state. Then, the 4D drift-kinetic model is studied with a mixed method, i.e. the semi-Lagrangian method in linear phase and finite difference method during the nonlinear phase. Numerical results show that the mixed method is efficient and accurate in linear phase and it is much stable during the nonlinear phase. Moreover, in practice it has better conservation properties.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207