MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411671900 · doi:10.1063/5.0272789

20-dimensional surrogate-assisted Bayesian optimization of laser-driven proton beams

2025· article· en· W4411671900 on OpenAlexafffund
Elias Catrix, S. Fourmaux, Simon Vallières, François Bianchi, François Fillion‐Gourdeau, Jean‐Sébastien Maltais, Steve MacLean, P. Antici

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationCompute Canada
KeywordsBayesian optimizationProtonLaserSurrogate modelBayesian probabilityMaterials scienceSurrogate endpointOptoelectronicsOpticsPhysicsComputer scienceNuclear physicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser-driven proton acceleration, as obtained by the interaction of a high-intensity laser with matter, is a promising technique for generating high-quality proton beams. One of the main challenges is increasing the maximum proton energy. Here, we demonstrate a 70% increase in the maximum energy of laser-driven protons by optimizing the wavefront of the intense laser using machine learning: This was accomplished through adaptive control of a deformable mirror (DM) using a multi-step Random Forest surrogate-assisted Bayesian optimization approach. Starting from zeroed DM actuator voltages, our method identified an optimal configuration using 20 out of 48 actuators, requiring fewer than 150 experimental data samples. Our method surpassed conventional wavefront correction by 24%, which typically minimizes aberrations to converge toward a flat wavefront by leveraging real-time feedback from a wavefront sensor. This data-driven method integrating advanced wavefront control challenges the preference for correcting aberrations to achieve a flatter wavefront in laser-driven ion acceleration. We also propose a strategy for optimizing short focal length ion accelerators at facilities where measuring the wavefront at nominal full laser power is not implemented.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.795

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics LettersSame topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207