MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409318458 · doi:10.1088/1741-4326/adcb4f

Predictive integrated modelling of the hybrid and baseline scenarios of JT-60SA in view of the second operational phase

2025· article· en· W4409318458 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Gabriellini, V.K. Zotta, L. Garzotti, N. Aiba, J.F. Artaud, G. Giruzzi, G. Pucella, C. Sozzi, D. Taylor, T. Wakatsuki, Leonardo Burla, Cristiano Leoni, R. Gatto

Bibliographic record

VenueNuclear Fusion · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEUROfusion
KeywordsBaseline (sea)Phase (matter)Computer scienceNuclear engineeringEnvironmental sciencePhysicsEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The integrated modelling of two plasma scenarios, hybrid and baseline, envisaged for the second operational phase (OP2) of the JT-60SA tokamak has been performed using the 1.5-dimensional JINTRAC suite of codes and the Bohm/gyro-Bohm (BgB) semi-empirical transport model. The decision to use the BgB model is driven not only by its widespread application in predicting scenarios for JET and JT-60U similar to those anticipated for JT-60SA, but also by its low computational cost. Two versions of the hybrid scenario—3.7 MA/2.28 T and 2.7 MA/1.70 T with P aux = 19 MW—were optimized with respect to the reference METIS simulation to maintain a safety factor with a low magnetic shear region, q min > 1 and low shine-through losses. The results suggest that a high- β N ( ∼ 3 ) regime with a high non-inductive current fraction ( ∼ 70 % ) could be achieved during the initial research phase at 2.7 MA/1.70 T and at a Greenwald density fraction n e / n GW = 0.4 . Hybrid-like q profiles are expected to be more easily obtained at higher Greenwald density fractions (0.6–0.8), while at lower densities, challenges such as hollow current density profiles and reversed q profiles were mitigated by adjusting the negative-neutral beam injection power and the injector configuration. The baseline scenario—4.6 MA/2.28 T with P aux = 17.5 MW—demonstrated potential for high confinementperformance, achieving values of β N ∼ 1.8 , H 98 ∼ 1.0 , and W th ∼ 10 MJ. A scan of the temperature pedestal height and its effect on plasma performance underscores the need to develop a physics-based model capable of accurately predicting the H-mode pedestal.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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