The effect of pressure anisotropy on ballooning modes in tokamak plasmas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Edge Localised Modes are thought to be caused by a spectrum of magnetohydrodynamic instabilities, including the ballooning mode. While ballooning modes have been studied extensively both theoretically and experimentally, the focus of the vast majority of this research has been on isotropic plasmas. The prevalence of pressure anisotropy in modern tokamaks thus motivates further study of these modes. This paper presents a numerical analysis of ballooning modes in anisotropic equilibria. The investigation was conducted using the newly-developed codes HELENA+ATF and MISHKA-A, which adds anisotropic physics to equilibria and stability analysis. We have examined the impact of anisotropy on the stability of an n = 30 ballooning mode, confirming results conform to previous calculations in the isotropic limit. Growth rates of ballooning modes in equilibria with different levels of anisotropy were then calculated using the stability code MISHKA-A. The key finding was that the level of anisotropy had a significant impact on ballooning mode growth rates. For T ⊥ > T ∣ ∣ , typical of ICRH heating, the growth rate increases, while for T ⊥ < T ∣ ∣ , typical of neutral beam heating, the growth rate decreases.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".