Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 34 references

From Filamentation to Stratification: Instability Dynamics in Scissors-Shaped Relativistic Beam-Plasma System

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read When two electron beams cross at an angle instead of counter-streaming, the dominant instability switches from filamentation to a stratification mode, and collisionless magnetic reconnection quenches it, leaving a quasi-stable state with…

desk verdict A genuinely novel geometry suppresses filamentation in 2D PIC, but the 3D claim is asserted, not demonstrated, and the abstract oversells it. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04336 v1 pith:VLLIFUAD submitted 2025-07-06 physics.plasm-ph

Xu Liu , Dong Wu , Jie Zhang This is my paper
classification physics.plasm-ph
keywords filamentationinstabilityWeibelbeam-plasmamagneticreconnectionrelativisticelectronbeamsfastignitionparticle-in-cellsimulationmulti-velocity-componentplasma
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Two relativistic electron beams that cross at a small angle instead of streaming exactly opposite each other form what the paper calls a scissors-shaped system, and the paper argues that this simple change of geometry changes which instability wins. In two-dimensional particle-in-cell simulations with 10 MeV beams at a 15-degree crossing half-angle, the dominant mode is no longer filamentation but a stratification mode: parallel, alternating magnetic layers rather than toroidal filaments. Those layers are rapidly dissolved by collisionless magnetic reconnection within about 0.03 ps, and the system then settles into a quasi-stable state with magnetic energy about two orders of magnitude lower than the counter-streaming one-beam case and with fast-electron transverse uniformity kept for roughly 8 ps. The authors take this as a new principle of passive instability control by geometric configuration, relevant to multi-laser fast ignition and overlapping astrophysical jets, with a late bulk-cavitation stage in which magnetic energy grows as $E_{\mathrm{in}}\sim A(t-t_0)^4$.

What carries the argument

The central object is the scissors-shaped configuration, a two-velocity-component system of two symmetric fast electron beams plus a background return current, with the beam velocities making a 15-degree half-angle with the longitudinal axis. The mechanism that carries the argument is mode selection by broken symmetry: a two-dimensional Fourier analysis of the complex transverse field variable $(B_z+iB_y)$ shows that the wave vectors of the excited modes are concentrated along the new symmetry axis perpendicular to the plane of the beam velocities, so the magnetic field is layered rather than filamentary. The suppression of the resulting stratification mode is due to collisionless magnetic reconnection, which takes apart the alternating current layers on a sub-picosecond timescale. For the late nonlinear stage, the load-bearing theoretical object is a simplified hydrodynamic cavity model that predicts $E_{\mathrm{in}}\sim A(t-t_0)^4$ for the magnetic energy in the cavities, and the simulation exponent, between 3.95 and 4.05, matches it.

What would settle it

A three-dimensional particle-in-cell simulation with the same 10 MeV beams, 15-degree crossing half-angle, background density $500 n_c$, and finite longitudinal extent would settle the claim: the paper is wrong if the first 0.1 ps shows toroidal filaments instead of parallel alternating magnetic layers, or if the magnetic energy does not drop sharply after roughly 0.03 ps and settle about two orders below the one-beam value.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Breaking the cylindrical symmetry of a counter-streaming beam-plasma system changes the dominant electromagnetic instability from filamentation to a stratification mode. In the scissors-shaped configuration, two symmetric fast electron beams whose velocities lie at a 15-degree half-angle to a common axis with a background return current, the linearly excited magnetic field forms a series of parallel straight lines with alternating directions, not the toroidal shape of the filamentation instability. The Fourier spectrum of the transverse field concentrates along the new symmetry axis, perpendicular to the plane containing the two beam velocities. The stratification mode grows at a rate close to that of the single-beam filamentation instability, but it is quenched within a few hundredths of a picosecond by collisionless magnetic reconnection. The subsequent state has magnetic-field energy roughly two orders below the one-beam reference and a fast-electron transverse current inhomogeneity of about 10%, compared with more than 300% for the one-beam system. Around 8 ps a secondary, nonlinear stage begins: reconnection produces closed magnetic vortices that carve low-density cavities in the background plasma while leaving the fast beams almost uniform, and the cavity magnetic energy follows a $t^4$ growth law that the paper reproduces with a simplified hydrodynamic model. The paper presents this as evidence that geometric configuration alone can passively suppress beam-plasma instabilities and preserve beam quality on picosecond timescales.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a two-dimensional periodic-boundary transverse slice captures the essential physics of the real three-dimensional propagating system, which the paper itself flags as open because newly injected electrons will meet pre-formed cavities and strong fields.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the two-beam and infinite-beam systems, the fast-electron transverse current inhomogeneity stays near 10% and the energy spectrum barely broadens, whereas the one-beam system sees inhomogeneity above 300% and roughly 2 MeV of spectral broadening, so crossing beams preserve beam quality over several picoseconds.
  • Magnetic energy in the quasi-stable state is about two orders of magnitude lower than in the counter-streaming one-beam system, implying substantially less generated magnetic field and less beam deceleration during the linear and early nonlinear phases.
  • The theoretical growth rates satisfy $\Gamma_1 > \Gamma_2 \gg \Gamma_{\mathrm{inf}}$, and the two-beam rate converges to the one-beam rate as the crossing angle shrinks, giving a testable prediction that small-angle crossings behave like the counter-streaming limit.
  • The suppression is not limited to collisionless plasmas; the paper reports that the mechanism remains effective in collisional cases.
  • The quasi-stable state is temporary: around 8 ps a bulk-cavitation stage sets in and ends transverse uniformity, with cavity magnetic energy growing as $A(t-t_0)^4$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension is that the same design rule, arranging beams so the fastest-growing mode is one-dimensional and layered rather than filamentary, may apply to other multi-velocity-component plasmas, not just relativistic electron beams in fast ignition or jets.
  • Because the simulations are two-dimensional transverse slices with periodic boundaries, the most decisive next test is a full three-dimensional particle-in-cell run with the same parameters; if longitudinal transport or out-of-plane modes disrupt the layered state earlier than 8 ps, the proposed passive control principle would fail.
  • The convergence of the two-beam system to the infinite-beam, transversely isotropic behavior around 8 ps suggests that in realistic multi-laser overlap regions with many beams, the initial directionality advantage is itself transient and the system evolves toward isotropic velocity spread.
  • An experimental signature available to dual-beam laser facilities is the early-time magnetic structure: parallel alternating field layers in the crossing region within the first ~0.1 ps, rather than the filament tracks seen in single-beam experiments.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a 'scissors-shaped' configuration of two relativistic electron beams intersecting at a small half-angle, together with a neutralizing return current, and investigates the resulting beam-plasma instability dynamics using linear theory and 2D particle-in-cell simulations in the transverse z-y plane. The central claim is that breaking the cylindrical symmetry of the counter-streaming system changes the dominant instability from filamentation to a stratification mode, which is then rapidly quenched by collisionless magnetic reconnection, leaving a quasi-stable state with magnetic field energy two orders of magnitude lower than in the one-beam counter-streaming case. The authors also report a secondary 'bulk cavitation' phase beginning around t = 8 ps, during which the magnetic energy grows approximately as t^4, and they argue that the configuration preserves transverse beam uniformity for several picoseconds. The paper proposes this as a new principle of passive instability control via geometric configuration and claims the underlying physics is testable in upcoming multi-laser experiments.

Significance. If the reported effect is real and transfers to a propagating three-dimensional beam, it would be significant for fast-electron transport in inertial confinement fusion, especially the double-cone ignition scheme, and for interpreting overlapping astrophysical jets. The paper introduces a useful canonical configuration and provides 2D PIC results with high particle statistics, including convergence and collisional checks described in the supplementary material. The authors are also transparent about some limitations, such as the open question of 3D behavior. However, the quantitative support is limited to three 2D simulations without error bars or released run artifacts, and the quantitative derivations and fit details are mostly relegated to the supplementary material. The central physical claim is plausible but the headline experimental-verifiability claim is not supported by the present simulation setup.

major comments (3)
  1. [Simulation setups; Discussion and conclusion] The 2D periodic-boundary model does not include longitudinal advection or continuous injection of beam electrons, so the simulated system is a closed transverse slice of an initially uniform beam population. The paper's own Discussion concedes that newly introduced beams 'will encounter the pre-formed background cavities and strong magnetic fields, making them highly susceptible to filamentation.' This concession directly limits the scope of the central claim: the quasi-stable, two-orders-of-magnitude-suppressed magnetic state and the associated passive instability-control principle are established only for the initial interaction of a pre-existing population, not for a continuously propagating beam. The abstract's statement that the physics is verifiable in upcoming multi-laser experiments therefore overreaches, unless the authors add an explicit test with longitudinal transport or open boundaries, or restrict the claim to the linear stage.
  2. [Nonlinear stage; Transverse uniformity] The hydrodynamic model and the t^4 prediction are cited to the supplementary material, but the main text uses the fit result (exponent 3.95-4.05) to argue that the secondary growth is caused by bulk cavitation 'rather than being driven by other potential instabilities.' As written, the reader cannot assess this argument because neither the model equations nor the fitting procedure (number of data points, fit range, uncertainty) are given. Please include a concise derivation of Ein ~ (t - t0)^4 and a figure or table with the fit details in the main text or an appendix, or soften the exclusion claim.
  3. [Linear stage; Fig. 3(a), Fig. 3(b)-(d)] The claim that the theoretical ordering Γ1 > Γ2 ≫ Γinf 'matches the simulation results well' is only qualitative. The manuscript does not report measured growth rates extracted from the PIC data or an error estimate, so the reader cannot verify the core assertion that the scissors configuration suppresses the filamentation branch and selects the stratification mode. Please provide a quantitative comparison, such as fitted growth rates against the theoretical curves for the three cases.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Main text heading] The heading 'N onlinear stage' contains an extraneous space; please correct it to 'Nonlinear stage.'
  2. [Simulation setups] In the sentence 'our two-dimensional simulations with periodic boundary conditions focus on a small transverse cross-section of the system which captures the essential physics,' a comma is needed before 'which,' and the assertion that such a cross-section 'captures the essential physics' is exactly the point that needs justification given the continuous-injection issue.
  3. [Equation (1)] Please define the integration domain S and the angle brackets in Eq. (1) explicitly; currently the reader must infer that S is the whole simulation box and that angle brackets denote a spatial average.
  4. [Nonlinear stage] The citation [32] for the approximately linear growth of the equivalent cavity radius is to a general plasma-physics textbook; please cite the specific model or a derivation in the supplementary material instead.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the instability analysis is checked against independent simulations, and the 2D-to-3D gap is a stated limitation, not a self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The linear-stage dispersion relations are attributed to standard kinetic theory (refs. [6,17,18]) and the resulting growth-rate ordering Γ1 > Γ2 ≫ Γinf is compared with independent 2D Fourier spectra of the PIC simulations, not with fitted values from the same spectra. The one-beam, two-beam, and infinite-beam systems are distinct initial conditions, so the suppression of magnetic energy in the two-beam case is measured rather than enforced by construction. The bulk-cavitation scaling Ein ∼ A(t−t0)^4 is presented as a theoretical prediction and then checked by a power-law fit whose reported exponent (3.95–4.05) is a free fitted quantity; this is a weak validation but not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. Self-citations appear only as pointers to the authors' supplemental derivations and to the double-cone ignition motivation; neither is load-bearing for the central instability claim. The paper explicitly concedes that three-dimensional behavior remains an open question and that newly injected electrons may filament in pre-formed cavities; that is an external-validity limitation, not circularity. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction, and no uniqueness or authority argument is imported from prior work by the same authors.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result depends on the 2D geometry being representative of the 3D physics, on exact current neutralization in the initial conditions, and on the applicability of standard linear kinetic theory to the initial stage. The cavitation validation uses a power-law fit with free constants A and t0, and the main simulations are collisionless. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced; 'stratification' is a name for the observed mode structure, not a new entity.

free parameters (3)
  • cavitation amplitude A = not reported in main text
    Appears in the scaling Ein ~ A(t-t0)^4 and is fitted to simulation data in the bulk cavitation stage; the fitted value is not given in the main text.
  • cavitation onset time t0 = not reported in main text
    Free temporal origin in the power-law fit Ein ~ A(t-t0)^4; its value is adjusted to match the simulation data.
  • beam crossing half-angle theta = 15 degrees
    Representative configuration chosen by hand; the inset scans growth rate versus angle, so the central claim is not fitted to this value, but the detailed simulations use it.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A 2D transverse cross-section with periodic boundaries captures the essential instability physics of the 3D system
    Invoked in Simulation setups: 'our two-dimensional simulations with periodic boundary conditions focus on a small transverse cross-section of the system which captures the essential physics.' The paper later admits 3D behavior remains a critical open question.
  • domain assumption The background electron return current exactly neutralizes the fast-beam current in the longitudinal direction
    Used to initialize vp = -(nb/np) v0 cos 15 degrees for the two-beam system; the instability dynamics depend on this current neutralization.
  • domain assumption The main simulations are collisionless
    The main focus is the collisionless scenario; collisional cases are moved to the supplementary material, and the reconnection and cavitation mechanisms are interpreted without Coulomb collisions.
  • standard math Standard linear kinetic dispersion theory for unmagnetized homogeneous multi-stream plasmas applies to the initial stage
    Growth rates are derived using the relativistic Weibel and filamentation formalism of refs. [6,17,18,31] and checked against the 2D Fourier spectra of the simulations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of From Filamentation to Stratification: Instability Dynamics in Scissors-Shaped Relativistic Beam-Plasma System." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VLLIFUAD

@misc{pith2026250704336,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: From Filamentation to Stratification: Instability Dynamics in Scissors-Shaped Relativistic Beam-Plasma System},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VLLIFUAD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04336}
}
read the original abstract

Counter-streaming systems are a canonical model for beam-plasma instabilities, such as the filamentation instability, which is critical in high energy density physics. However, scenarios involving intersecting fast electron beams break the cylindrical symmetry inherent to such systems. Here, we introduce the scissors-shaped configuration, a fundamental multi-velocity-component system that captures this broken symmetry. Through theoretical analysis and particle-in-cell simulations, we reveal a dramatic shift in the instability dynamics: the system undergoes a stratification mode instead of filamentation. This mode is rapidly quenched by magnetic reconnection, leading to a quasi-stable state with magnetic energy two orders of magnitude lower than in the counter-streaming case. This discovery establishes a new principle of passive instability control via geometric configuration, offering a new perspective on beam-plasma interactions in astrophysics and inertial confinement fusion. The underlying physics is verifiable in upcoming multi-laser experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.04336 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic diagram of the scissors-shaped configura [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Temporal evolution of magnetic field energy in three cases, with black dashed line indicating the magnetic field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Dispersion relation curves for the three systems. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Transverse inhomogeneity (RSD) of the fast electron (solid lines) and background electron (dashed lines) current [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Fast electron energy spectrum of (a) one-beam, (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Tabak, J

    M. Tabak, J. Hammer, M. E. Glinsky, W. L. Kruer, S. C. Wilks, J. Woodworth, E. M. Campbell, and M. D. Perry, Ignition and high gain with ultrapowerful lasers, Phys. Plasmas 1, 1626 (1994)

    work page 1994

  2. [2]

    Caruso and V

    A. Caruso and V. A. Pais, The ignition of dense DT fuel by injected triggers, Nucl. Fusion 36, 745 (1996)

    work page 1996

  3. [3]

    N. G. Basov, S. Y. Gus’kov, and L. P. Feokistov, Ther- monuclear gain of ICF targets with direct heating of ignitor, J. Sov. Laser Res. 13, 396 (1992)

    work page 1992

  4. [4]

    Yamanaka, Kongo Project Report (1983)

    T. Yamanaka, Kongo Project Report (1983)

    work page 1983

  5. [5]

    Schlickeiser, On the origin of cosmological magnetic fields by plasma instabilities, Plasma Phys

    R. Schlickeiser, On the origin of cosmological magnetic fields by plasma instabilities, Plasma Phys. Control. Fu- sion 47, A205 (2005)

    work page 2005

  6. [6]

    Lazar, R

    M. Lazar, R. Schlickeiser, R. Wielebinski, and S. Poedts, COSMOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF WEIBEL-TYPE IN- STABILITIES, ApJ 693, 1133 (2009)

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    Bret, Weibel, two-stream, filamentation, oblique, Bell, Buneman...which one grows faster?, ApJ 699, 990 (2009)

    A. Bret, Weibel, two-stream, filamentation, oblique, Bell, Buneman...which one grows faster?, ApJ 699, 990 (2009)

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    Stockem, I

    A. Stockem, I. Lerche, and R. Schlickeiser, The Relativis- tic Filamentation Instability in Magnetized Plasmas, ApJ 659, 419 (2007)

    work page 2007

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    Schlickeiser, S

    R. Schlickeiser, S. Krakau, and M. Supsar, PLASMA EF- FECTS ON F AST PAIR BEAMS. II. REACTIVE VER- SUS KINETIC INSTABILITY OF PARALLEL ELEC- TROSTATIC W A VES, ApJ777, 49 (2013)

    2013

  2. [10]

    E. S. Weibel, Spontaneously growing transverse waves in a plasma due to an anisotropic velocity distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2, 83 (1959)

    1959

  3. [11]

    Lee and M

    R. Lee and M. Lampe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 31, 1390 (1973)

    1973

  4. [12]

    Sentoku, K

    Y. Sentoku, K. Mima, P. Kaw, and K. Nishikawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 15 (2003)

    2003

  5. [13]

    A. Bret, L. Gremillet, and M. E. Dieckmann, Phys. 6 Plasmas 17, 120501 (2010)

    2010

  6. [14]

    A. P. L. Robinson, Nucl. Fusion 54, 054003 (2014)

    2014

  7. [15]

    P. H. Yoon and R. C. Davidson, Exact analytical model of the classical Weibel instability in a relativistic anisotropic plasma, Phys. Rev. A 35, 2718 (1987)

    1987

  8. [16]

    L. O. Silva, R. A. Fonseca, J. W. Tonge, W. B. Mori, and J. M. Dawson, On the role of the purely transverse Weibel instability in fast ignitor scenarios, Phys. Plasmas 9, 2458–2461 (2002)

    2002

  9. [17]

    Bret, M.-C

    A. Bret, M.-C. Firpo, and C. Deutsch, Characterization of the Initial Filamentation of a Relativistic Electron Beam Passing through a Plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 115002 (2005)

    2005

  10. [18]

    Bret, M.-C

    A. Bret, M.-C. Firpo, and C. Deutsch, Collective elec- tromagnetic modes for beam-plasma interaction in the whole k space, Phys. Rev. E 70, 046401 (2004)

    2004

  11. [19]

    Hao, Z.-M

    B. Hao, Z.-M. Sheng, and J. Zhang, Kinetic theory on the current-filamentation instability in collisional plasmas, Phys. Plasmas 15, 082112 (2008)

    2008

  12. [20]

    Hao, Z.-M

    B. Hao, Z.-M. Sheng, C. Ren, and J. Zhang, Relativis- tic collisional current-filamentation instability and two- stream instability in dense plasma, Phys. Rev. E 79, 046409 (2009)

    2009

  13. [21]

    Bertrand, M

    P. Bertrand, M. Albrecht-Marc, T. R´ eveill´ e, and A. Ghizzo, Vlasov Models for Laser-Plasma Interaction, Transp. Theory Stat. Phys. 34, 103 (2005)

    2005

  14. [22]

    Inglebert, A

    A. Inglebert, A. Ghizzo, T. Reveille, D. Del Sarto, P. Bertrand, and F. Califano, Multi-stream Vlasov model for the study of relativistic Weibel-type instabilities, Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 54, 085004 (2012)

    2012

  15. [23]

    Inglebert, A

    A. Inglebert, A. Ghizzo, T. Reveille, P. Bertrand, and F. Califano, Electron temperature anisotropy instabilities represented by superposition of streams, Phys. Plasmas 19, 122109 (2012)

    2012

  16. [24]

    Honda, J

    M. Honda, J. Meyer-ter Vehn, and A. Pukhov, Collective Stopping and Ion Heating in Relativistic-Electron-Beam Transport for Fast Ignition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2128 (2000)

    2000

  17. [25]

    Karmakar, N

    A. Karmakar, N. Kumar, and A. Pukhov, Detailed particle-in-cell simulations on the transport of a relativis- tic electron beam in plasmas, Phys. Rev. E 80, 016401 (2009)

    2009

  18. [26]

    C. Ren, M. Tzoufras, F. S. Tsung, W. B. Mori, S. Amorini, R. A. Fonseca, L. O. Silva, J. C. Adam, and A. Heron, Global Simulation for Laser-Driven MeV Electrons in Fast Ignition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 185004 (2004)

    2004

  19. [27]

    R. Jung, J. Osterholz, K. L¨ owenbr¨ uck, S. Kiselev, G. Pret- zler, A. Pukhov, O. Willi, S. Kar, and M. e. a. Borghesi, Study of Electron-Beam Propagation through Preionized Dense Foam Plasmas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 195001 (2005)

    2005

  20. [28]

    Tatarakis, F

    M. Tatarakis, F. N. Beg, E. L. Clark, A. E. Dangor, R. D. Edwards, R. G. Evans, T. J. Goldsack, K. W. D. Leding- ham, and P. A. e. a. Norreys, Propagation Instabilities of High-Intensity Laser-Produced Electron Beams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 175001 (2003)

    2003

  21. [29]

    M. S. Wei, F. N. Beg, E. L. Clark, A. E. Dangor, R. G. Evans, A. Gopal, K. W. D. Ledingham, P. McKenna, and P. A. e. a. Norreys, Observations of the filamentation of high-intensity laser-produced electron beams, Phys. Rev. E 70, 056412 (2004)

    2004

  22. [30]

    Zhang, W

    J. Zhang, W. M. Wang, X. H. Yang, D. Wu, Y. Y. Ma, Z. Jiao, F. Y. Zhang, X. H. Wu, Y. T. Yuan, J. Li, and J. Q. Zhu, Double-cone ignition scheme for inertial confinement fusion, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 13, 378 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    [6,15-18,28,32-34]

    See Supplemental Material for the derivations of disper- sion relations of instabilities, the additional PIC simu- lation results, the effect of ions on linear and the bulk cavitation stage, theoretical model and analysis of the bulk cavitation stage, the simulation results of...

  24. [32]

    Hu, Fundamentals of Plasma Theory(Peking Univer- sity Press, Beijing, 2006)

    X. Hu, Fundamentals of Plasma Theory(Peking Univer- sity Press, Beijing, 2006)

    2006

  25. [33]

    Hao, Z.-M

    B. Hao, Z.-M. Sheng, and J. Zhang, Collisional Effects on the Relativistic Current Filamentation Instability: with and without the Space Charge Effect, Laser and Particle Beams 32, 79–88 (2014)

    2014

  26. [34]

    Fiore, M

    M. Fiore, M. Marti, R. A. Fonseca, and L. O. Silva, Enhancement of the filamentation instability due to col- lisions, Conference on Plasma Physics - 34 European Physical Society (2007)

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.