MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251879173 · doi:10.1088/0029-5515/53/1/010201

Message from the Editor

2012· article· en· W4251879173 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R.D. Stambaugh

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Fusion · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear fusionTokamakMagnetic confinement fusionFusion powerStellaratorNuclear physicsNuclear engineeringPhysicsPlasmaEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The journalNuclear Fusionhas played a key role in the development of the physics basis for fusion energy. That physics basis has been sufficiently advanced to enable construction of such major facilities as ITER along the tokamak line in magnetic fusion and the National Ignition Facility (NIF) in laser-driven fusion. In the coming decade, while ITER is being constructed and brought into deuterium–tritium (DT) operation, this physics basis will be significantly deepened and extended, with particular key remaining issues addressed. Indeed such a focus was already evident with about 19% of the papers submitted to the 24th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference in San Diego, USA appearing in the directly labelled ITER and IFE categories. Of course many of the papers in the other research categories were aimed at issues relevant to these major fusion directions. About 17% of the papers submitted in the ‘Experiment and Theory’ categories dealt with the highly ITER relevant and inter-related issues of edge-localized modes, non-axisymmetric fields and plasma rotation. It is gratifying indeed to see how the international community is able to make such a concerted effort, facilitated by the ITPA and the ITER-IO, around such a major issue for ITER. In addition to deepening and extending the physics bases for the mainline approaches to fusion energy, the coming decade should see significant progress in the physics basis for additional fusion concepts. The stellarator concept should reach a high level of maturity with such facilities as LHD operating in Japan and already producing significant results and the W7-X in the EU coming online soon. Physics issues that require pulses of hundreds of seconds to investigate can be confronted in the new superconducting tokamaks coming online in Asia and in the major stellarators. The basis for steady-state operation of a tokamak may be further developed in the upper half of the tokamak operating space—the wall stabilized regime. New divertor geometries are already being investigated. Progress should continue on additional driver approaches in inertial fusion.Nuclear Fusionwill continue to play a major role in documenting the significant advances in fusion plasma science on the way to fusion energy. Successful outcomes in projects like ITER and NIF will bring sharply into focus the remaining significant issues in fusion materials science and fusion nuclear science and technology needed to move from the scientific feasibility of fusion to the actual realization of fusion power production. These issues are largely common to magnetic and inertial fusion. Progress in these areas has been limited by the lack of suitable major research facilities. Hopefully the coming decade will see progress along these lines.Nuclear Fusionwill play its part with increased papers reporting significant advances in fusion materials and nuclear science and technology. The reputation and status of the journal remains high; paper submissions are increasing and the Impact Factor for the journal remains high at 4.09 for 2011. We look forward in the coming months to publishing expanded versions of many of the outstanding papers presented at the IAEA FEC in San Diego. We congratulate Dr Patrick Diamond of the University of California at San Diego for winning the 2012Nuclear FusionPrize for his paper [1] and Dr Hajime Urano of the Japan Atomic Energy Agency for winning the 2011Nuclear FusionPrize for his paper [2]. Papers of such quality by our many authors enable the high standard of the journal to be maintained. TheNuclear Fusioneditorial office understands how much effort is required by our referees. The Editorial Board decided that an expression of thanks to our most loyal referees is appropriate and so, since January 2005, we have been offering ten of the most active referees over the past year a personal subscription toNuclear Fusionwith electronic access for one year, free of charge. This year, three of the top referees have reviewed five manuscripts in the period November 2011 to December 2012 and provided excellent advice to the authors. We have excluded our Board Members, Guest Editors of special editions and those referees who were already listed in recent years. The following people have been selected: Marina Becoulet, CEA-Cadarache, France Jiaqui Dong, Southwestern Institute of Physics, China Emiliano Fable, Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Germany Ambrogio Fasoli, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Switzerland Eric Fredrickson, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, USA Manuel Garcia-Munoz, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, Germany William Heidbrink, California University, USA Katsumi Ida, National Inst. For Fusion Science, Japan Peter Stangeby, Toronto University, Canada James Strachan, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, USA Victor Yavorskij, Ukraine National Academy of Sciences, Ukraine In addition, there is a group of several hundred referees who have helped us in the past year to maintain the high scientific standard ofNuclear Fusion. At the end of this issue we give the full list of all referees for 2012. Our thanks to them!

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1130.080

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuclear FusionSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207