Single-stage gradient-based stellarator coil design: stochastic optimization
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 We extend the single-stage stellarator coil design approach for quasi-symmetry on axis from (Giuliani et al 2020) to additionally take into account coil manufacturing errors. By modeling coil errors independently from the coil discretization, we have the flexibility to consider realistic forms of coil errors. The corresponding stochastic optimization problems are formulated using a risk-neutral approach and risk-averse approaches. We present an efficient, gradient-based descent algorithm which relies on analytical derivatives to solve these problems. In a comprehensive numerical study, we compare the coil designs resulting from deterministic and risk-neutral stochastic optimization and find that the risk-neutral formulation results in more robust configurations and reduces the number of local minima of the optimization problem. We also compare deterministic and risk-neutral approaches in terms of quasi-symmetry on and away from the magnetic axis, and in terms of the confinement of particles released close to the axis. Finally, we show that for the optimization problems we consider, a risk-averse objective using the conditional value-at-risk leads to results which are similar to the risk-neutral objective.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it