Direct stellarator coil optimization for nested magnetic surfaces with precise quasi-symmetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a robust optimization algorithm for the design of electromagnetic coils that generate vacuum magnetic fields with nested flux surfaces and precise quasi-symmetry. The method is based on a bilevel optimization problem, where the outer coil optimization is constrained by a set of inner least squares optimization problems whose solutions describe magnetic surfaces. The outer optimization objective targets coils that generate a field with nested magnetic surfaces and good quasi-symmetry. The inner optimization problems identify magnetic surfaces when they exist, and approximate surfaces in the presence of magnetic islands or chaos. We show that this formulation can be used to heal islands and chaos, thus producing coils that result in magnetic fields with precise quasi-symmetry. We show that the method can be initialized with coils from the traditional two-stage coil design process, as well as coils from a near-axis expansion optimization. We present a numerical example where island chains are healed and quasi-symmetry is optimized up to surfaces with aspect ratio 6. Another numerical example illustrates that the aspect ratio of nested flux surfaces with optimized quasi-symmetry can be decreased from 6 to approximately 4. The last example shows that our approach is robust and a cold-start using coils from a near-axis expansion optimization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".