Tokamak discharge simulation coupling free-boundary equilibrium and plasma model with application to JT-60SA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to simulate a full tokamak discharge, a fast integrated tokamak modeling tool for scenario design, METIS, is coupled with a quasi-static free-boundary magnetic equilibrium code, FEEQS. The first code is able to compute at each time the plasma equilibrium, the current density and plasma pressure profiles. The generated outputs are iteratively used by the second code that computes the poloidal field coils currents needed in order to obtain a given plasma shape. This is used to assess the feasibility of scenarios designed by integrated modeling simulations. This approach is much faster with respect to full simulators, equipped with specific feedback controllers, and can be regarded as complementary or preparatory to much more time-consuming scenario control optimisation. The results obtained with the equilibrium code are benchmarked with data already available and computed using the TOSCA code. To illustrate how the coupled codes work, the optimization of one of the reference scenarios of the JT-60SA tokamak is carried out. The use of this new simulation tool for tokamak scenario design is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".