MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281393693 · doi:10.1134/s0021364022200279

Study of Geodesic Acoustic and Alfvén Modes in Toroidal Fusion Devices (Brief Review)

2022· article· en· W4281393693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. V. Melnikov, V.A. Vershkov, S.A. Grashin, М.А. Drabinskiy, L.G. Eliseev, I. A. Zemtsov, V.A. Krupin, V. P. Lakhin, S. E. Lysenko, A. R. Nemets, M.R. Nurgaliev, N. K. Khartchev, P.O. Khabanov, D. A. Shelukhin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTokamakPlasmaPhysicsStellaratorAtomic physicsComputational physicsReflectometrySpherical tokamakGeodesicCyclotronElectric fieldToroidTurbulenceNuclear physicsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geodesic acoustic modes, Alfvén eigenmodes, stationary and oscillating components of the electric field, and their relations to plasma confinement have been studied. Theoretical concepts of the interaction of geodesic acoustic modes with other types of plasma turbulence have been tested. Concomitant problems such as the effect of heating methods on the plasma confinement and turbulence, as well as the properties of impurities and scrape-off layer have also been discussed. Key diagnostics such as heavy ion beam probe, correlation reflectometry, and multipurpose optical diagnostic complex have been described. The main experiments have been performed at the T-10 tokamak, which has a high-power electron cyclotron resonance heating system. The supporting experiments have been performed at the TJ-II stellarator in Spain, the COMPASS tokamak in Czech Republic, and the STOR-M tokamak in Canada. The results of the experiments have been compared with the analytical and numerical calculations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics LettersSame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207