MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001396867 · doi:10.1063/1.5125759

Crossed beam energy transfer in the presence of laser speckle ponderomotive self-focusing and nonlinear sound waves

2020· article· en· W3001396867 on OpenAlexaff
S. Hüller, Gaurav Raj, W. Rozmus, D. Pesme

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Plasmas · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersH2020 EuratomFusion Energy Sciences
KeywordsPhysicsSpeckle patternOpticsPlasmaBeam (structure)Ponderomotive forceLaserQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crossed beam energy transfer, CBET, is investigated by taking into account the speckle structure of smoothed laser beams that overlap in a plasma with an inhomogeneous flow profile. Using the two-dimensional simulation code Harmony, it is shown how ponderomotive self-focusing of laser speckles in crossing beams can significantly affect the transfer of energy from one beam to the other. The role of plasma flow in speckle self-focusing is investigated and revisited, in particular its consequences in terms of redirection and increasing angular spread of the laser beams due to beam bending and plasma-induced smoothing, respectively. In close-to-sonic flow, the onset of self-focusing in the beam speckle structure occurs at considerably lower beam intensities than expected for the case without flow. CBET and speckle self-focusing can, hence, occur together when two crossed beams with equal frequency resonantly exchange energy via their ponderomotively driven density perturbations flowing with sound speed. From the simulations, it is found that consequences of ponderomotive self-focusing can be expected above an average intensity threshold scaling as IL∼2×1014 W cm−2(λ0/1 μm)−2(Te/ keV ), with an impact on the spatial and temporal coherence of the transmitted light. The density perturbations due to the ponderomotive force of the crossing beams can locally be enhanced in self-focusing speckles, partly leading to shock-like structures. These structures eventually increase the effect of plasma-induced smoothing and are at the origin of the stronger angular spread.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of PlasmasSame topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207