Synergy effects during current drive by two lower-hybrid waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent lower-hybrid current drive experiments on the experimental advanced superconducting tokamak, two lower-hybrid waves are launched simultaneously from different locations with different phase velocities to drive the plasma current. To understand the synergy effects of the two LH waves, the analytical expression for the electron velocity distribution is obtained based on Fuchs' model [Fuchs et al., Phys. Fluids 28(12), 3619–3628 (1985)], which is in good agreement with that obtained by solving the quasi-linear equation numerically via the CQL3D code [R. W. Harvey and M. G. McCoy, in Proceedings of IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Advances in Simulation and Modeling of Thermonuclear Plasmas, Montreal, Canada (1992)]. The synergy factor is also obtained analytically. It is found that the existence of two resonant regions may bring more resonant electrons interacting with each wave and the perpendicular dynamics can further enhance the synergy effect by increasing the effective electron temperature, which in turn increases the number of electrons in the resonance with each wave.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".