2D axial-azimuthal particle-in-cell benchmark for low-temperature partially magnetized plasmas
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The increasing need to demonstrate the correctness of computer simulations has highlighted the importance of benchmarks. We define in this paper a representative simulation case to study low-temperature partially-magnetized plasmas. Seven independently developed particle-in-cell codes have simulated this benchmark case, with the same specified conditions. The characteristics of the codes used, such as implementation details or computing times and resources, are given. First, we compare at steady-state the time-averaged axial profiles of three main discharge parameters (axial electric field, ion density and electron temperature). We show that the results obtained exhibit a very good agreement within 5% between all the codes. As <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">E</mml:mi> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">B</mml:mi> </mml:math> discharges are known to cause instabilities propagating in the direction of electron drift, an analysis of these instabilities is then performed and a similar behaviour is retrieved between all the codes. A particular attention has been paid to the numerical convergence by varying the number of macroparticles per cell and we show that the chosen benchmark case displays a good convergence. Detailed outputs are given in the supplementary data, to be used by other similar codes in the perspective of code verification.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it