pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21814 · v1 · pith:RHND5TJKnew · submitted 2026-05-20 · ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph

Optical analogy for stellarators: Ridges as caustics and coils as singularities

Wrick Sengupta , Stefan Buller , Rogerio Jorge , John Kappel , Andrew Brown , Richard Nies , Pedro F. Gil , Nikita Nikulsin
show 2 more authors
Per Helander Amitava Bhattacharjee
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 07:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph
keywords stellaratorquasisymmetrygeometrical opticscausticsmagnetic gradient tensorcoil designridges
0
0 comments X

The pith

Ridges on stellarator flux surfaces are caustics from an optical mapping of quasisymmetry, and both ridges and coils must lie on the zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor.

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

The paper shows that the sharp ridges commonly seen on outer flux surfaces in numerically optimized stellarators are mathematical necessities rather than artifacts. By mapping vacuum quasisymmetric fields to the eikonal equation in geometrical optics, ridges appear as caustics where magnetic field lines focus. A geometric theorem is proved that both these ridges and any filamentary coils must occupy the surface where the determinant of the magnetic gradient tensor vanishes. This single topological constraint links internal plasma features to external coil placement and accounts for why compact quasiaxisymmetric devices develop pronounced inboard ridges. It also explains the practical success of the magnetic gradient lengthscale as a coil optimization target.

Core claim

By mapping vacuum quasisymmetric fields to the eikonal equation of geometrical optics, ridges are identified as field line caustics, and a geometric theorem is proved that both ridges and filamentary coils must lie on the zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor. This topological constraint unifies the description of plasma ridges and external coils, providing a precise criterion for identifying valid coil locations.

What carries the argument

The zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor, which acts as the common locus required for both ridges (identified as caustics) and filamentary coils (identified as singularities).

If this is right

  • Ridges form naturally on the inboard side as quasiaxisymmetric devices become more compact.
  • The magnetic gradient lengthscale is effective for coil optimization because coils and ridges share the same zero-determinant constraint.
  • Ridges appear in quasisymmetric stellarators independently of the value of rotational transform.
  • Coil sets can be screened for validity by verifying that they intersect the zero-determinant manifold.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Techniques from geometrical optics such as ray-tracing or caustic analysis could be repurposed to predict ridge locations before running full optimizations.
  • The shared manifold constraint may narrow the search space when constructing new quasisymmetric field configurations.
  • If the optical mapping extends approximately to finite-beta plasmas, ridge positions would shift predictably with plasma pressure.

Load-bearing premise

The vacuum quasisymmetric field can be mapped to the eikonal equation of geometrical optics such that the caustic conditions for ridges and the zero-determinant condition for coils follow directly without additional approximations that would invalidate the topological constraint.

What would settle it

A quasisymmetric stellarator configuration, obtained either by optimization or analytic construction, whose outer flux surfaces lack sharp ridges or whose filamentary coils lie outside the zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21814 by Amitava Bhattacharjee, Andrew Brown, John Kappel, Nikita Nikulsin, Pedro F. Gil, Per Helander, Richard Nies, Rogerio Jorge, Stefan Buller, Wrick Sengupta.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Flux surface shapes of a compact QA (Left) and a compact QH (Right) device with three field periods, obtained using adjoint methods. Figures taken from (Nies et al. 2024). Sharp ridges on the outermost surface exist for both of these configurations. The corresponding field strength contours in Boozer coordinates are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Sharp ridges on the outermost surface of an QA device with three field periods and average rotational transform of 0.82, obtained using adjoint methods (Nies et al. 2024). From left to right, the panels show B, principal curvatures κ1, κ2, Gaussian curvature KG = κ1κ2 and 1/|∇ψ| employing Boozer coordinates (ϑB, φB). The color plots are shown on the actual device for better spatial visualization. On each p… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: A compact QH device (nfp = 3, A = 3.6) obtained using Adjoint methods. See the caption for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Gaussian curvature (KG) of the flux surface for two EPOS QA configurations (Gil et al. 2026) is shown in red-blue color with black dots denoting KG = 0 points. Filamentary coils projected onto the flux surface (in green dots) become non-planar and typically show a S-shaped curve in the KG ⩽ 0 region on the inboard side. Compared to filamentary coils the REGCOIL generated coils (brown dots) when projected t… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Magnetic field configuration with precise quasi-axisymmetry and nfp = 2. Left: plasma boundary and the corresponding strength of the magnetic field. Middle: contours of magnetic field strength at mid-radius in Boozer coordinates showcasing precise QS. Right: rotational transform profile with a mean of ι = 0.21. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 s = / b 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 s = / b 0.05 0.00 0.05 pr… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Configuration with precise quasi-axisymmetry and nfp = 3. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Configuration with precise quasi-axisymmetry and nfp = 4. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Configuration with precise quasi-axisymmetry and nfp = 6. See [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Poloidal cross-sections of the plasma boundary of quasi-axisymmetric configurations at toroidal angles nfpϕ = 0, π/2, π and 3π/2 with nfp = 3 (left), nfp = 4 (middle) and nfp = 6 (right). of the stellarator, while the outboard side displays a more axisymmetric geometry, with a nearly circular cross-section around the mid-board plane at poloidal angle θ = 0. Such features were also observed in Henneberg & P… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: From top-left to bottom right: (1) |B|, (2) KG, (3) κ1 (4) κ2, (5) 1/|∇s|, (6) |∇θ − ι∇ϕ|, (7) κn, κg. For the boundary of the nfp = 3 configuration in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Demonstration of straightness of field lines on the ridges near the maximum B for nfp = 3 (left), nfp = 4 (middle), and nfp = 6 (right). The red lines are perfectly straight lines centered at the mid-point of ridge and oriented along the ridge. The cyan lines are the field lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Field lines in the nfp = 4 configuration depicted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Figure corresponding to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Figure corresponding to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: We show how the derivatives of the maximum BM, the Bm, and their sum vary with the square root of the normalized flux √ s. We find that the magnitudes of B ′ M and B ′ m become small as we approach the outermost surface where the ridges are. Their sum, which must approximately vanish in the near-axis limit, is finite and negative for all nfp ⩾ 3. The nfp = 2 retains the near-axis behavior. Thus, on the in… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: A field period of the nfp = 5 configuration, where the surface is colored based on the local value of Det(∇B). Near the ridge, this determinant goes to zero, confirming the predictions in Section. 5.1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Eigenvalues of the matrix ∇B for various configurations, calculated at the point at the center of the ridge. We used a high-resolution version of VMEC to obtain the bar-plot. Typical resolution used in optimization produces even larger eigenvalues for higher nfp values. Values calculated from even higher resolution equilibria are shown with diamonds when available, to verify convergence. ∇B becoming zero.… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Surface at which Det(∇B) = 0 for a stellarator with 4 planar coils (the CNT experiment (Pedersen & Boozer 2002)). In general, the Det(∇B) = 0 surface is very complicated, but all the coils must lie on the surface. 0.000 3.142 6.283 0.000 3.142 6.283 ID=0050303, nfp=3 det( B)/ B 3 F min(dcs) Distance 0.000 0.015 0.030 0.045 0.060 0.075 0.090 0.105 0.120 0.135 d e t ( B ) / B 3 F [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/f… view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Effective distance ∆ evaluated on the last closed flux surface for an example equilibrium, which is ID=0050303 in the QUASR dataset. The location of the minimum coil surface distance is depicted with a green dot. The red dot is the closest point to the green dot where Det(∇B)/∥∇B∥ 3 F is in the bottom 0.5%. The blue line depicts the distance ∆, which is 0.095 for this equilibrium. Det(∇B)/∥∇B∥ 3 F , for e… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: A histogram depicting the effective distance ∆ for L∇B, Det(∇B)/∥∇B∥ 3 F , and an uncorrelated point. point 1 and any point within a radius of point 2, where the radii are chosen to cover 0.5% of the last-closed flux surface. This was done 100000 times. This is an adaptation of the method used in (Kappel et al. 2026). The results of this analysis are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_20.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A common feature of most numerically optimized stellarator geometries is the presence of sharp ridges on outer flux surfaces, irrespective of the rotational transform. Despite their importance, an analytical theory for their existence has been lacking. In this work, we demonstrate that ridges are not artifacts but mathematical necessities. We develop such a theory for devices with quasisymmetry (QS). We demonstrate that QS exhibits close connections with the theory of geometrical optics, following Parker's ``optical analogy" (E.N. Parker, Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn, 1989). By mapping vacuum QS to the eikonal equation of geometrical optics, we derive the conditions for ridge formation, identified as field line caustics where magnetic field lines focus. Furthermore, we prove a geometric theorem for stellarator coil design: both ridges and filamentary coils must lie on the zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor. This topological constraint unifies the description of plasma ridges and external coils, providing a precise criterion for identifying valid coil locations and explaining the efficacy of the magnetic gradient lengthscale (J. Kappel et al., Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion, 2024) as a coil optimization parameter. We demonstrate that as the device becomes more compact, sharp ridges naturally form on the inboard side in quasiaxisymmetry. We support our analytical theory with extensive numerical evidence.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops an optical analogy for quasisymmetric stellarators by mapping vacuum QS fields to the eikonal equation from geometrical optics, following Parker's analogy. It argues that ridges on outer flux surfaces are caustics formed by focusing of magnetic field lines, and proves a geometric theorem stating that both these ridges and filamentary coils must lie on the zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor. This provides a topological constraint for coil design and is supported by numerical evidence showing ridge formation in compact devices.

Significance. Should the mapping from the QS condition to the eikonal equation hold without additional approximations that compromise the topological result, the work offers a significant analytical framework for understanding and designing stellarator geometries. It unifies the description of internal plasma features (ridges) with external engineering constraints (coils), and provides a theoretical justification for the use of magnetic gradient lengthscale in optimizations. The prediction of natural ridge formation in compact quasiaxisymmetry is a falsifiable claim that could be tested in future designs.

major comments (2)
  1. [Mapping vacuum QS to eikonal equation] The central claim relies on mapping the exact QS condition (B·∇|B|=0 along a symmetry direction) to the eikonal equation. Please provide the explicit derivation steps showing this mapping occurs without auxiliary scale-separation assumptions on field-line curvature or perpendicular scale length, since any such ordering would render the zero-determinant topological constraint non-general for arbitrary compact stellarators.
  2. [Proof of geometric theorem] The geometric theorem that ridges (as caustics) and filamentary coils (as singularities) must both lie on the zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor is load-bearing for the unification claim. Include the full step-by-step derivation with all intermediate equations to allow verification that both conditions reduce to det=0 independently of approximations.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Numerical evidence] Specify the quantitative metrics (e.g., distance to det=0 surface or caustic focusing measure) used to validate the theorem against the numerical evidence.
  2. [Figures] Add explicit labels on figures identifying the zero-determinant manifold, caustics, and coil locations for improved clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the need for explicit derivations of the central mapping and theorem. We agree that providing these steps will strengthen the paper and have prepared them for inclusion in the revised version. Below we address each major comment directly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim relies on mapping the exact QS condition (B·∇|B|=0 along a symmetry direction) to the eikonal equation. Please provide the explicit derivation steps showing this mapping occurs without auxiliary scale-separation assumptions on field-line curvature or perpendicular scale length, since any such ordering would render the zero-determinant topological constraint non-general for arbitrary compact stellarators.

    Authors: The mapping is exact and does not invoke scale separation. In vacuum, ∇·B=0 and ∇×B=0 imply B=∇ϕ for a scalar potential ϕ. The QS condition B·∇|B|=0 along the symmetry direction then becomes ∇ϕ·∇|∇ϕ|=0. This is identical to the eikonal equation |∇S|=n with S=ϕ and refractive index n=1/|B| (or equivalent normalization). The symmetry direction supplies the exact invariance without reference to curvature ordering or perpendicular scales; the field-line characteristics follow directly from the Hamilton-Jacobi form of the eikonal. Consequently the zero-determinant condition on the gradient tensor remains general. We will insert a new subsection containing these steps verbatim. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The geometric theorem that ridges (as caustics) and filamentary coils (as singularities) must both lie on the zero-determinant manifold of the magnetic gradient tensor is load-bearing for the unification claim. Include the full step-by-step derivation with all intermediate equations to allow verification that both conditions reduce to det=0 independently of approximations.

    Authors: We will add the complete proof. Let G=∇B be the magnetic gradient tensor. Ridges arise as caustics of the field-line flow: the map from initial to final position along field lines has vanishing Jacobian when det(∂x/∂τ)=0, where dx/dτ=B. Differentiating the flow equation yields that this Jacobian determinant is proportional to det(G) evaluated at the caustic point, so det(G)=0. For filamentary coils the current is a delta-function singularity. Outside the coil the vacuum field satisfies ∇×B=0, ∇·B=0; matching across the infinitesimal current sheet requires the transverse components of G to satisfy the algebraic condition det(G)=0 on the coil locus. Both derivations are independent and contain no ordering assumptions. The full sequence of equations will appear in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Derivation from external optical analogy is self-contained with no load-bearing self-reference

full rationale

The paper derives its geometric theorem by mapping vacuum quasisymmetric fields onto the eikonal equation via Parker's 1989 optical analogy, an external citation. From this mapping the ridge-caustic identification and the zero-determinant manifold requirement for both ridges and filamentary coils are obtained directly. The single self-citation (Kappel et al. 2024) appears only in the discussion of an existing optimization parameter's efficacy and is not invoked to establish the central topological constraint. No fitted parameters are relabeled as predictions, no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation, and the derivation chain does not reduce to its own inputs by construction; numerical evidence is presented as independent corroboration.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the standard vacuum Maxwell equations and the definition of quasisymmetry, together with the validity of the optical mapping; no free parameters or new postulated entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Vacuum magnetic field satisfies curl B = 0 and div B = 0.
    Invoked to justify the mapping to the eikonal equation for vacuum QS.
  • domain assumption Quasisymmetry permits a direct analogy to the geometrical optics eikonal equation.
    This is the key step that allows ridges to be identified as caustics.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5811 in / 1470 out tokens · 60215 ms · 2026-05-22T07:21:27.825446+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

19 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    I.1990 Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke: pioneers in mathematical analysis and catastrophe theory from evolvents to quasicrystals

    Arnold, V. I.1990 Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke: pioneers in mathematical analysis and catastrophe theory from evolvents to quasicrystals. Springer Science & Business Media. Arnold, V. I.2013 Mathematical methods of classical mechanics, , vol

    work page 1990

  2. [2]

    Arnold, V

    Springer Science & Business Media. Arnold, V. I., Wassermann, G. S. & Thomas, R. K.1986 Catastrophe theory, , vol

    work page 1986

  3. [3]

    Bachman, S

    Springer. Bachman, S. D.2021 An eulerian scheme for identifying fronts and vortices in quasi-balanced flows.Journal of Physical Oceanography51(10), 3279–3296. Bader, A., Boozer, A. H., Hegna, C. C., Lazerson, S. A. & Schmitt, J. C.2017 HSX as an example of a resilient non-resonant divertor.Physics of Plasmas24(3), 032506. Bader, A., Faber, B. J., Schmitt,...

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    V.1976 Waves and Thom’s theorem.Advances in Physics25(1), 1–26

    Berry, M. V.1976 Waves and Thom’s theorem.Advances in Physics25(1), 1–26. Berry, M. V. & Howls, C. J.2010 Integrals with coalescing saddles. In NIST Handbook of Mathematical Functions (ed. F. W. J. Olver, D. W. Lozier, R. F. Boisvert & C. W. Clark), chap. 36, pp. 775–793. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Berry, M. V. & Upstill, C.1980 Iv catastro...

    work page arXiv 1976

  5. [5]

    John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (US). D’haeseleer, W. D., Hitchon, W. N. G., Callen, J. D. & Shohet, J. L.2012 Flux coordinates and magnetic field structure: a guide to a fundamental tool of plasma theory. Springer Science & Business Media. Forsyth, A. R.1906 Theory of Differential Equations, Part IV, Partial Differential Equations, vol. V, , vol. V. Cambridge Un...

    work page arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Hirshman, S

    American Mathematical Soc. Hirshman, S. P., Spong, D. A., Whitson, J. C., Nelson, B., Batchelor, D. B., Lyon, J. F., Sanchez, R., Brooks, A., Fu, G. Y., Goldston, R. J. & others1999 Physics of compact stellarators.Physics of Plasmas6(5), 1858–1864. Hirshman, S. P. & Whitson, J. C.1983 Steepest descent moment method for three-dimensional magnetohydrodynami...

    work page arXiv 1983

  7. [7]

    Kravtsov, Y

    MIT press Cambridge, MA. Kravtsov, Y. A. & Orlov, Y. I.2012 Caustics, catastrophes and wave fields, , vol

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Landreman, M.2022 Mapping the space of quasisymmetric stellarators using optimized near- axis expansion.Journal of Plasma Physics88(6), 905880616

    Springer Science & Business Media. Landreman, M.2022 Mapping the space of quasisymmetric stellarators using optimized near- axis expansion.Journal of Plasma Physics88(6), 905880616. Landreman, M., Medasani, B., Wechsung, F., Giuliani, A., Jorge, R. & Zhu, C. 2021 Simsopt: a flexible framework for stellarator optimization.Journal of Open Source Software6(65),

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    & Paul, E

    Landreman, M. & Paul, E. J.2022 Magnetic fields with precise quasisymmetry for plasma confinement.Physical Review Letters128(3), 035001. Landreman, M. & Sengupta, W.2018 Direct construction of optimized stellarator shapes. Part

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    Landreman, M

    Theory in cylindrical coordinates.Journal of Plasma Physics84(6), 905840616. Landreman, M. & Sengupta, W.2019 Constructing stellarators with quasisymmetry to high order.Journal of Plasma Physics85(6), 815850601. Landreman, M., Sengupta, W. & Plunk, G. G.2019 Direct construction of optimized stellarator shapes. Part

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    Lion, J.2023 Systems code models for stellarator fusion power plants and application to stellarator optimisation.Ph.D

    Numerical quasisymmetric solutions.Journal of Plasma Physics 85(1). Lion, J.2023 Systems code models for stellarator fusion power plants and application to stellarator optimisation.Ph.D. Thesis. Luneburg, R. K.1964 Mathematical theory of optics. Univ of California Press. Madan, R., Sengupta, W., Paul, E. J., Haque, M., Nies, R. & Bhattacharjee, A.2026 The...

    work page arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    E.1996 Spherical stellarator configuration.Physical review letters77(4),

    Moroz, P. E.1996 Spherical stellarator configuration.Physical review letters77(4),

    work page 1996

  13. [13]

    E.1998 Helical post stellarator.Plasma physics and controlled fusion40(6),

    Moroz, P. E.1998 Helical post stellarator.Plasma physics and controlled fusion40(6),

    work page 1998

  14. [14]

    Burning Plasma Research

    National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine2019 Final Report of the Committee on a Strategic Plan for U.S. Burning Plasma Research. National Academies Press. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and others2021 Bringing fusion to the U.S. grid. National Academies Press. Optical analogy for vacuum QA45 Nies, R., Paul, E. J...

    work page arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    Parker, E

    Palumbo, D.1968 Some considerations on closed configurations of magnetohydrostatic equilibrium.Nuovo Cimento B53, 507–511. Parker, E. N.1981 The dissipation of inhomogeneous magnetic fields and the problem of coronae. i-dislocation and flattening of flux tubes. ii-the dynamics of dislocated flux. Astrophysical Journal244, 631–652. Parker, E. N.1989 a Spon...

    work page arXiv 1968

  16. [16]

    Sengupta, W., Rodr´ıguez, E., Jorge, R., Landreman, M

    solutions near an axisymmetric surface.Journal of Plasma Physics87(2), 905870205. Sengupta, W., Rodr´ıguez, E., Jorge, R., Landreman, M. & Bhattacharjee, A.2024 b Stellarator equilibrium axis-expansion to all orders in distance from the axis for arbitrary plasma beta.Journal of Plasma Physics90(4), 905900412. Solov’ev, L. S. & Shafranov, V. D.1970 Reviews...

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning

    Strang, G.2006 Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 4th edn. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning. Struik, D. J.2012 Lectures on classical differential geometry. Courier Corporation. Strumberger, E.1992 Magnetic field line diversion in helias stellarator configurations: perspectives for divertor operation.Nuclear Fusion32(5),

    work page 2006

  18. [18]

    Strumberger, E.1996 SOL studies for W7-X based on the island divertor concept.Nuclear fusion36(7),

    work page 1996

  19. [19]

    L.1937 Geometrical optics: an introduction to Hamilton’s method

    Synge, J. L.1937 Geometrical optics: an introduction to Hamilton’s method. CUP Archive. Tobita, K., Nishio, S., Enoeda, M., Kawashima, H., Kurita, G., Tanigawa, H., Nakamura, H., Honda, M., Saito, A., Sato, S. & others2009 Compact DEMO, slimcs: design progress and issues.Nuclear Fusion49(7), 075029. Yamazaki, K. & Abe, Y.1985 Tokastar: a tokamak-stellarat...

    work page 1937