Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 33 references

Distortions in Charged-Particle Images of Laser Direct-Drive Inertial Confinement Fusion Implosions

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that filamentary electric or magnetic fields around an imploding fusion target, not the imaging hardware, distort knock-on deuteron images and prevent source reconstruction in cryogenic direct-drive implosions.

desk verdict A plausible, well-evidenced mechanism for KoDI distortions that overclaims at the quantitative margin; deserves review with a tightened comparison. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03362 v2 pith:ETMSW7IL submitted 2024-12-04 physics.plasm-ph

P. V. Heuer , J. L. Peebles , J. Kunimune , H. G. Rinderknecht , J. R. Davies , V. Gopalaswamy , J. Frelier , M. Scott
show 12 more authors
J. Roberts B. Brannon H. McClow R. Fairbanks S. P. Regan J. A. Frenje M. Gatu Johnson F. H. Séguin A. J. Crilly B. D. Appelbe M. Farrell J. Stutz
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.plasm-ph
keywords knock-ondeuteronimagerpenumbralimaginginertialconfinementfusionfilamentaryelectromagneticfieldscharged-particleimagedistortionsparticletracingprotonradiographycryogenicDTimplosions
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

The paper tries to establish why the knock-on deuteron imager (KoDI), built to image fusion products from cryogenic deuterium–tritium implosions, returns images that cannot be turned back into a picture of the fusion source. It shows that the images are systematically too large, shift with deuteron energy, and have distorted dark centers, and it argues that all three distortions come from the same cause: scattering of deuterons by strong filamentary electric or magnetic fields in the plasma surrounding the implosion. Supporting evidence is a particle-tracing simulation that reproduces the observed distortions when fields are set to the strengths inferred from proton radiography. If the paper is right, the deuteron source cannot be reconstructed from these images with the standard instrument response, and filamentary fields are a fundamental obstacle to charged-particle imaging of laser-driven implosions unless the particles are emitted after the filaments have dissipated.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the filamentary-field scattering model implemented in a custom particle tracer. Charged or current-carrying filaments are placed radially around the target (120 filaments extending to roughly 3 mm, with alternating current directions in the magnetic case), with field strengths anchored to a lower bound inferred from proton radiographs of comparable implosions: at least -32 nC of distributed charge, or at least 500 A along the filaments, corresponding to line-integrated fields on the order of 100 kV or 1 T mm. The tracer pushes deuterons with a leapfrog particle pusher through fields computed from standard electric and magnetic source laws, and an iterative aperture-sampling scheme concentrates simulated particles into the pinhole so that penumbral images can be compared with experiment. The physical punchline is geometric: a deuteron scattered at a distance from the target has already moved transverse to the imaging axis, so stochastic scattering far from the source inflates the apparent source size and produces the energy-dependent image offset.

What would settle it

Time-resolved proton radiographs of a cryogenic implosion taken at bang time that measure line-integrated fields below the model's lower bound, roughly 100 kV or 1 T mm, would falsify the filament-scattering explanation; equivalently, a cryogenic implosion whose bang time is delayed more than about 300 ps after the laser drive ends but that still shows the same anomalous magnification and smearing would contradict the model's central timing claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using roughly forty cryogenic direct-drive implosions at a laser facility, the paper documents three reproducible image distortions: anomalous magnification of the deuteron penumbra (up to roughly 20% larger than the x-ray image through the same aperture), an energy-dependent drift of low-energy deuteron images that appears as smearing when summed, and umbra nonuniformities. It first eliminates aperture charging and aperture scattering as explanations: hardware insulation changes do not reduce the magnification, and scattering in the aperture adds only uniform background or leaves the 50% radius unchanged. It then proposes that deuterons are stochastically deflected by filamentary electric or magnetic fields that surround the implosion while the laser is still driving it, and shows that synthetic KoDI images produced by tracing deuterons through such fields reproduce the magnification, smearing, and umbra distortions. The paper's conclusion is that these filamentary fields are the best explanation and that they prevent reconstruction of the deuteron source in cryogenic implosions.

Load-bearing premise

The model's synthetic images reproduce the distortions only if the real web of filamentary fields around the target at the moment of peak fusion is well approximated by simple straight radial filaments whose field strengths are taken from proton radiographs of different, similar implosions; if the actual topology or strength at bang time differs, the match could be coincidental.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the filament-scattering model is correct, KoDI images of cryogenic implosions cannot be used to reconstruct hot-spot and fuel asymmetry with the current point-spread functions; even shots with near-unity magnification and small offsets retain enough penumbral distortion to spoil the reconstruction.
  • The aperture-charging and aperture-scattering explanations are discarded: nonconductive hardware changes had no effect on the magnification, and scattering in the aperture cannot move the penumbral edge outward.
  • Charged-particle imaging of inertial confinement fusion remains viable only when the measured particles are produced after the laser drive ends and the filaments have dissipated, which explains why earlier warm-implosion data with a coast phase showed only mild distortions.
  • The same filamentary fields are expected to produce fluence nonuniformities in backlighter proton radiographs and to bias other charged-particle diagnostics that assume a fixed field of view or isotropic emission.
  • Future work should focus on the mechanism that generates the filaments, because no method of suppressing them for fusion-relevant targets is known.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: the paper leaves open whether the deflecting fields are electric or magnetic; a wider-range energy scan of deuteron and triton image shifts could separate \delta \propto 1/W from \delta \propto 1/\sqrt W and thereby constrain the filament generation mechanism.
  • Editorial extension: because the apparent-source-size argument is demonstrated for specific radial-filament configurations and not derived generally, a laboratory calibration with a known scattering structure placed at controlled distances from a point source could test the claimed linear dependence of apparent source size on scatter location.
  • Editorial extension: if the filamentary fields are this strong at bang time, charged-particle spectrometers that infer areal density or yield from energy loss may also need their effective field of view corrected, since scattering can change which emission angles contribute to a measurement even when the measured spectrum is unchanged.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper characterizes three distortions observed in knock-on deuteron images from the KoDI diagnostic on OMEGA cryogenic direct-drive implosions: anomalous magnification, energy-dependent smearing, and umbra nonuniformity. It argues that a previously proposed aperture-charging mechanism is inconsistent with the data, that aperture scattering cannot explain the effects, and proposes instead that the distortions are caused by scattering of knock-on deuterons in filamentary electric or magnetic fields surrounding the implosion. The authors support this with a particle-tracing model whose field strengths are anchored to a lower bound inferred from independent proton radiography of similar implosions, and they show that synthetic KoDI images reproduce the qualitative types of distortion (magnified penumbrae, energy-dependent offsets, distorted penumbral shapes). They conclude that the filamentary scattering model best matches the observed image distortions and that such fields are a fundamental obstacle to charged-particle imaging of ICF implosions.

Significance. If the filamentary scattering model is correct, it has substantial implications for the field: standard penumbral reconstruction of KoDI images in cryogenic implosions would be invalid, and similar caution would apply to other charged-particle diagnostics whose particles traverse the corona during the drive. The paper's strengths include a forward model that is grounded in independently measured field-strength lower bounds from proton radiography, a purpose-built particle pusher with an adaptive sampling scheme that makes the synthetic KoDI calculations tractable, a validation study against a known non-round source (Sec. V A), and an explicit statement of the model's own limitations, including the absence of an upper bound on the field strength and the acknowledged idealization of the filament geometry. These strengths make the paper a useful and credible contribution even though the central quantitative claim is not yet fully supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. V B and Fig. 15] The central claim in Sec. VI that particle-tracing in filamentary fields 'reproduces all of the image distortions observed in KoDI data' is not supported by the quantitative comparison presented here. The synthetic image offsets are stated to be 'generally lower than the experimental data,' but no error bars are shown in Fig. 15, and no statistical model comparison, likelihood, or goodness-of-fit metric is computed between the synthetic and experimental distributions of magnification ratio, image offset, or umbra profile. Because the model parameters are not constrained by the KoDI data themselves, the agreement shown could be coincidental rather than causal. Please provide a matched quantitative comparison, including measurement uncertainties on the experimental quantities and propagated uncertainties on the synthetic quantities, and state which of the observed features are reproduced within those uncertainties.
  2. [Sec. IV A and Sec. V B] The field-strength input to the model is only a lower bound: Sec. IV A states that no upper bound can be established from the proton radiographs because the filamentary caustic features persist at all measured proton energies. Since the synthetic offsets are already below the experimental values, the field strength can be raised without an observational constraint, and the model can in principle be pushed until the offsets match. What remains untested is whether a single set of parameters, at field strengths sufficient to match the observed offsets, simultaneously reproduces the energy dependence of the offsets (Fig. 5(c) versus Fig. 15(b)), the anomalous magnification ratio (Fig. 7(a) versus Fig. 15(a)), and the umbra profiles for individual shots. The paper should either perform this multi-observable test or explicitly narrow the central claim to the statement that the model can reproduce the qualitative distortion types at some allowed field strength.
  3. [Sec. V C] The physical interpretation claims that scattering far from the source 'substantially increas[es] the apparent size of the deuteron source' and that 'any scattering field, electric or magnetic, can have this effect.' This is demonstrated only for the specific radial-filament configurations used in the simulations, and the manuscript acknowledges in Sec. IV A that the real structure is 'closer to a Voronoi lattice.' Since the causal argument for the magnification distortion depends on the generic behavior of scattering in a complex field topology, please either provide an analytic or general geometric argument for why the apparent source-size increase is topology-independent, or test the sensitivity of the magnification and offset predictions to different filament geometries (e.g., a Voronoi-like mesh) and to time-evolved field configurations.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. III C and Eq. (3)] The heuristic PSF in Eq. (3) is described as fitting experimental data better than the charged-aperture PSF, but Fig. 6 shows this comparison for a single shot with free parameters (mr, sigma_b). Please clarify whether the comparison is representative across the dataset and how the free parameters were chosen.
  2. [Sec. II B and Fig. 5(d)] The fits to the energy-dependent displacement in Fig. 5(d) are said to be equally well described by electric and magnetic field models; the paper should state the reduced chi-squared or equivalent statistic for both fits so that the reader can assess how discriminating the data actually are.
  3. [Sec. IV A] The synthetic proton radiographs in Fig. 12 are described as having grid-pattern artifacts due to the proximity of the fields to the particle source; a brief explanation of why these artifacts do not affect the inferred lower bound on field strength would be helpful.
  4. [Sec. V B and Fig. 15(c)] The structural similarity index is used to argue that even low-field cases prevent accurate reconstruction, but the threshold 'SSIM < 0.8' appears to be arbitrary. Please cite a source for the threshold or provide a sensitivity analysis showing how reconstruction accuracy varies with SSIM.
  5. [Sec. IV B] The adaptive sampling algorithm is a key enabling element, but the description of how the 'second-generation, higher-resolution population' is initialized could be more precise: specify the procedure for choosing the spread of initial positions and velocities around the tagged particles and how convergence of the final 1.5e6 particles through the aperture is verified.
  6. [Sec. II A and Table I] Table I reports fitting errors and combined errors, but the text should clarify whether the '2% error in the aperture radius and separation' is a systematic uncertainty that should be applied to both x-ray and KoD values when comparing Mr,KoD with Msep,KoD.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity in the central claim; the synthetic distortions are forward predictions from independently inferred field strengths, with only a minor non-load-bearing heuristic PSF that bakes in the measured magnification.

  1. self definitional [Sec. III C, Eq. (3) and Fig. 6]
    "Stochastic scattering off of the filaments imposes a Gaussian blur on the PSF. We suppose (and later show in Sec. V) that scattering in the radially oriented filaments around the implosion also tends on average to move the apparent source of the deuterons closer to the aperture, increasing the apparent image magnification. We convolve these effects in a heuristic model I(r) = K(σ) ∗ H(M mrRap − r) ... We see in Fig. 6 that this PSF fits experimental data better than the charged aperture PSF"

    This heuristic filament-scattering PSF is written directly with the measured anomalous magnification ratio mr inside the step edge, so fitting it to the KoD penumbra re-inserts the quantity it is claimed to explain; the better fit in Fig. 6 is therefore partly self-definitional rather than an independent test of scattering. The authors explicitly label it heuristic and note the source blur is degenerate with the scattering blur, and the later particle-tracing comparison in Secs. IV-V does not use Eq. (3), so this step is not load-bearing for the central conclusion.

full rationale

No load-bearing circular step was found in the central derivation. The field strengths used for the synthetic KoDI runs (-32 to -96 nC and 500 A) are lower bounds inferred from 15-MeV proton radiographs of separate implosions (Sec. IV A), not fitted to the KoDI magnification or offsets. The synthetic magnification ratios, offsets, and SSIM values are forward-model outputs, and Sec. V B in fact reports that the synthetic offsets are generally lower than the experimental data, so the model under-predicts rather than being constructed to match. The particle tracer is based on standard Boris integration and Biot-Savart/Gauss-law field construction, and the radial-filament geometry is openly acknowledged as an idealization of the observed Voronoi-like web, which is a modeling limitation rather than a circular reduction. The paper also explicitly identifies the self-definitional character of the charged-aperture PSF ('Both methods compensate for the anomalous magnification by definition') and rejects that branch. Self-citations to prior proton-radiography and KoDI work are to published experimental measurements and to an earlier hypothesis that is tested and rejected; they do not supply an unverified theorem that forces the conclusion. The only circular flavor is the Eq. (3) heuristic PSF, which is minor and non-load-bearing, so the central claim retains independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central model rests on field strengths and geometries inferred from separate proton radiography campaigns, which is independent support, but the idealized radial filament distribution and the source model are ad hoc to this paper. No new physical entities are introduced; the filaments are known from prior experiments.

free parameters (5)
  • Total filament charge (electric model) = -32, -64, -96 nC
    Values scanned at or above the lower bound inferred from proton radiography; not fitted to KoDI data, but the model outcome depends on them.
  • Positive center charge = 32 nC
    Chosen to represent capsule potential; authors note little effect on synthetic data.
  • Filament current (magnetic model) = 500 A per filament
    Lower bound from radiography; only one value tested, so the model's magnetic case is under-explored.
  • Number of radial filaments = 120
    Arbitrary model choice; experimental structure is a web closer to a Voronoi lattice, affecting scattering statistics.
  • Heuristic PSF parameters (mr, sigma_b) = shot-dependent
    Eq. (3) fits penumbral data but is heuristic and not part of the central synthetic-model claim.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Filamentary electric or magnetic fields exist around the implosion at bang time with strength at least the lower bound from proton radiography
    The model relies on the persistence of filaments at bang time; Sec. III C and Fig. 10 support this but direct measurement during a cryogenic implosion is not available.
  • domain assumption Scattering can be modeled by deterministic deflection in prescribed E/B fields from line charges or currents
    The particle pusher in Sec. IV uses Biot-Savart and Gauss's law with idealized radial filaments; actual field structure is a web closer to a Voronoi lattice, as acknowledged in Sec. IV A.
  • domain assumption Knock-on deuteron source can be modeled as a spherical shell with velocity weighting from the scattering probability
    Source model in Sec. IV B: low-energy deuterons from a ring at large angles, high-energy from the center. This affects synthetic image formation.
  • domain assumption KoD collisions in the coronal plasma are negligible
    Stated in Sec. V C; no numerical support given, but standard plasma physics.
  • domain assumption All collected charged particles are deuterons, not tritons
    Stated in Sec. I; KoD and KoT produce similar images, but discrimination is unsolved.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Distortions in Charged-Particle Images of Laser Direct-Drive Inertial Confinement Fusion Implosions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ETMSW7IL

@misc{pith2026241203362,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Distortions in Charged-Particle Images of Laser Direct-Drive Inertial Confinement Fusion Implosions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ETMSW7IL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03362}
}
read the original abstract

Energetic charged particles generated by inertial confinement fusion (ICF) implosions encode information about the spatial morphology of the hot-spot and dense fuel during the time of peak fusion reactions. The knock-on deuteron imager (KoDI) was developed at the Omega Laser Facility to image these particles in order to diagnose low-mode asymmetries in the hot-spot and dense fuel layer of cryogenic deuterium--tritium ICF implosions. However, the images collected are distorted in several ways that prevent reconstruction of the deuteron source. In this paper we describe these distortions and a series of attempts to mitigate or compensate for them. We present several potential mechanisms for the distortions, including a new model for scattering of charged particles in filamentary electric or magnetic fields surrounding the implosion. Particle-tracing is used to create synthetic KoDI data based on the filamentary field model that reproduces the main experimentally observed image distortions. We conclude that the filamentary scattering model best matches the observed image distortions. Finally, we discuss potential impacts of filamentary fields on other charged-particle diagnostics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.03362 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. DT knock-on deuteron (solid) and knock-on triton [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. A comparison of synthetic neutron, KoD, KoT, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Diagram of the original KoDI hardware showing (a) the pinhole array, (b) the detector position, and (c) the detector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (15 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Image plate (x-ray) and (b) CR-39 (deuteron) data from a cryogenic DT implosion. Given the dimensions of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Low-energy KoD images from different shots exhibiting (a) minimal or (b) significant smearing. The points in (b) mark [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Azimuthally averaged high-energy deuteron data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The high energy KoD anomalous magnification ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Reconstructed (a) x-ray and (b) high-energy KoD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Radial profiles of synthetic penumbral images pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Experimental 15-MeV proton radiographs of a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. A histogram (a) shows the locations of the initial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Synthetic radiographs corresponding to the experi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. (a) Penumbral image of a hemi-ellipsoidal deuteron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: In the no-field cases, the source is accurately [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. (top row) Penumbral images and (bottom row) deconvolved images of the inferred deuteron source from synthetic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_14.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Penumbral images formed with a round 12-MeV [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_16.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Plots of (a) magnification ratio, (b) penumbral im [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_15.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. (a) Initial deuteron source locations are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_17.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    F. H. S´ eguin, J. A. Frenje, C. K. Li, D. G. Hicks, S. Kurebayashi, J. R. Rygg, B.-E. Schwartz, R. D. Pe- trasso, S. Roberts, J. M. Soures, D. D. Meyerhofer, T. C. Sangster, J. P. Knauer, C. Sorce, V. Y. Glebov, C. Stoeckl, T. W. Phillips, R. J. Leeper, K. Fletcher, and S. Padalino, Spectrometry of charged particles from inertial-confinement-fusion plasm...

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    Regan, V

    S. Regan, V. Goncharov, I. Igumenshchev, T. Sangster, R. Betti, A. Bose, T. Boehly, M. Bonino, E. Campbell, D. Cao, T. Collins, R. Craxton, A. Davis, J. Delet- trez, D. Edgell, R. Epstein, C. Forrest, J. Frenje, D. Froula, M. Gatu Johnson, V. Glebov, D. Harding, M. Hohenberger, S. Hu, D. Jacobs-Perkins, R. Janezic, M. Karasik, R. Keck, J. Kelly, T. Kessle...

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    I. V. Igumenshchev, D. T. Michel, R. C. Shah, E. M. Campbell, R. Epstein, C. J. Forrest, V. Y. Glebov, V. N. Goncharov, J. P. Knauer, F. J. Marshall, R. L. Mc- Crory, S. P. Regan, T. C. Sangster, C. Stoeckl, A. J. Schmitt, and S. Obenschain, Three-dimensional hydrody- namic simulations of omega implosions, Physics of Plas- mas 24, 10.1063/1.4979195 (2017)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4979195 2017

  4. [4]

    Gatu Johnson, B

    M. Gatu Johnson, B. D. Appelbe, J. P. Chittenden, A. Crilly, J. Delettrez, C. Forrest, J. A. Frenje, V. Y. Glebov, W. Grimble, B. M. Haines, I. V. Igumenshchev, R. Janezic, J. P. Knauer, B. Lahmann, F. J. Marshall, T. Michel, F. H. S´ eguin, C. Stoeckl, C. Walsh, A. B. Zyl- stra, and R. D. Petrasso, Impact of imposed mode 2 laser drive asymmetry on inerti...

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5066435 2019

  5. [5]

    Cola ¨ ıtis, D

    A. Cola ¨ ıtis, D. Turnbull, I. Igumenschev, D. Edgell, R. Shah, O. Mannion, C. Stoeckl, D. Jacob-Perkins, A. Shvydky, R. Janezic, A. Kalb, D. Cao, C. Forrest, J. Kwiatkowski, S. Regan, W. Theobald, V. Goncharov, and D. Froula, 3d simulations capture the persistent low- mode asymmetries evident in laser-direct-drive implo- sions on OMEGA, Phys. Rev. Lett....

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    F. H. S´ eguin, J. L. DeCiantis, J. A. Frenje, S. Kure- bayashi, C. K. Li, J. R. Rygg, C. Chen, V. Berube, B. E. Schwartz, R. D. Petrasso, V. A. Smalyuk, F. J. Marshall, J. P. Knauer, J. A. Delettrez, P. W. McKenty, D. D. Mey- erhofer, S. Roberts, T. C. Sangster, K. Mikaelian, and H. S. Park, D3he-proton emission imaging for inertial- confinement-fusion e...

    work page 2004

  7. [7]

    J. L. DeCiantis, F. H. S´ eguin, J. A. Frenje, V. Berube, M. J. Canavan, C. D. Chen, S. Kurebayashi, C. K. Li, J. R. Rygg, B. E. Schwartz, R. D. Petrasso, J. A. Delet- trez, S. P. Regan, V. A. Smalyuk, J. P. Knauer, F. J. Marshall, D. D. Meyerhofer, S. Roberts, T. C. Sangster, C. Stoeckl, K. Mikaelian, H. S. Park, and H. F. Robey, Proton core imaging of t...

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2173788 2006

  8. [8]

    H. G. Rinderknecht, P. V. Heuer, J. Kunimune, P. J. Adrian, J. P. Knauer, W. Theobald, R. Fairbanks, B. Brannon, L. Ceurvorst, V. Gopalaswamy, C. A. Williams, P. B. Radha, S. P. Regan, M. G. Johnson, F. H. S´ eguin, and J. A. Frenje, A knock-on deuteron imager for measurements of fuel and hotspot asymme- try in direct-drive inertial confinement fusion imp...

    work page 2022

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    J. H. Kunimune, H. G. Rinderknecht, P. J. Adrian, P. V. Heuer, S. P. Regan, F. H. S´ eguin, M. G. Johnson, R. P. Bahukutumbi, J. P. Knauer, B. L. Bachmann, and J. A. Frenje, Knock-on deuteron imaging for diagnosing the morphology of an ICF implosion at OMEGA, Phys. Plas- mas 2...

    2022

  2. [10]

    Delettrez, R

    J. Delettrez, R. Epstein, M. C. Richardson, P. A. Jaan- imagi, and B. L. Henke, Effect of laser illumination nonuniformity on the analysis of time-resolved x-ray mea- surements in uv spherical transport experiments, Physi- 17 cal Review A 36, 3926 (1987)

    1987

  3. [11]

    Gopalaswamy, R

    V. Gopalaswamy, R. Betti, P. B. Radha, A. J. Crilly, K. M. Woo, A. Lees, C. Thomas, I. V. Igumenshchev, S. C. Miller, J. P. Knauer, C. Stoeckl, C. J. Forrest, O. M. Mannion, Z. L. Mohamed, H. G. Rinderknecht, and P. V. Heuer, Analysis of limited coverage effects on areal densi...

    2022

  4. [12]

    MacFarlane, I

    J. MacFarlane, I. Golovkin, P. Wang, P. Woodruff, and N. Pereyra, Spect3d – a multi-dimensional collisional- radiative code for generating diagnostic signatures based on hydrodynamics and pic simulation output, High En- ergy Density Physics 3, 181 (2007)

    2007

  5. [13]

    Cartwright, E

    B. Cartwright, E. Shirk, and P. Price, A nuclear-track- recording polymer of unique sensitivity and resolution, Nuclear Instruments and Methods 153, 457 (1978)

    1978

  6. [14]

    Lahmann, M

    B. Lahmann, M. G. Johnson, J. A. Frenje, Y. Y. Glebov, H. G. Rinderknecht, F. H. S´ eguin, G. Sutcliffe, and R. D. Petrasso, CR-39 nuclear track detector response to iner- tial confinement fusion relevant ions, Review of Scientific Instruments 91, 053502 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    R. S. Craxton, K. S. Anderson, T. R. Boehly, V. N. Goncharov, D. R. Harding, J. P. Knauer, R. L. Mc- Crory, P. W. McKenty, D. D. Meyerhofer, J. F. Myatt, A. J. Schmitt, J. D. Sethian, R. W. Short, S. Skup- sky, W. Theobald, W. L. Kruer, K. Tanaka, R. Betti, T. J. B. Collins, J...

    2015

  8. [16]

    Gopalaswamy, C

    V. Gopalaswamy, C. A. Williams, R. Betti, D. Patel, J. P. Knauer, A. Lees, D. Cao, E. M. Campbell, P. Far- makis, R. Ejaz, K. S. Anderson, R. Epstein, J. Carroll- Nellenbeck, I. V. Igumenshchev, J. A. Marozas, P. B. Radha, A. A. Solodov, C. A. Thomas, K. M. Woo, T. J. B. Colli...

    2024

  9. [17]

    C. A. Williams, R. Betti, V. Gopalaswamy, J. P. Knauer, C. J. Forrest, A. Lees, R. Ejaz, P. S. Farmakis, D. Cao, P. B. Radha, K. S. Anderson, S. P. Regan, V. Y. Glebov, R. C. Shah, C. Stoeckl, S. Ivancic, K. Churnetski, R. T. Janezic, C. Fella, M. J. Rosenberg, M. J. Bonino, D...

    2024

  10. [18]

    Storn and K

    R. Storn and K. Price, Differential evolution – a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over con- tinuous spaces, J. Global Optim. 11, 341 (1997)

    1997

  11. [19]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Pe- terson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, ˙I. Po- lat, Y...

    2020

  12. [20]

    Foreman-Mackey, D

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Good- man, emcee: The MCMC Hammer, arXiv 125, 306 (2013), arXiv:1202.3665 [astro-ph.IM]

    2013 arXiv

  13. [21]

    H. G. Rinderknecht, Studies of non-hydrodynamic pro- cesses in ICF implosionson OMEGA and the National Ignition Facility, Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2015)

    2015

  14. [22]

    Gelfgat, E

    V. Gelfgat, E. Kosarev, and E. Podolyak, Programs for signal recovery from noisy data using the maximum likeli- hood principle, Comput. Phys. Commun. 74, 335 (1993)

    1993

  15. [23]

    PlasmaPy Community, N. A. Murphy, E. T. Ever- son, D. Sta´ nczak-Marikin, P. V. Heuer, P. M. Ko- zlowski, E. T. Johnson, R. Malhotra, D. A. Schaffner, S. T. Vincena, M. Abler, J. Addison, A. F. Ahamed, P. V. Alarcon, B. Antognetti, C. Arran, H. Baghe- rianlemraski, J. Beckers,...

    2024

  16. [24]

    Brown, M

    D. Brown, M. Chadwick, R. Capote, A. Kahler, A. Trkov, M. Herman, A. Sonzogni, Y. Danon, A. Carlson, M. Dunn, D. Smith, G. Hale, G. Arbanas, R. Arcilla, C. Bates, B. Beck, B. Becker, F. Brown, R. Casper- 18 son, J. Conlin, D. Cullen, M.-A. Descalle, R. Firestone, T. Gaines, K....

    2018

  17. [25]

    J. F. Ziegler, SRIM - The Stopping and Ranging of Ions in Matter (2013), http://www.srim.org/

    2013

  18. [26]

    J. R. Rygg, F. H. Seguin, C. K. Li, J. A. Frenje, M. J.-E. Manuel, R. D. Petrasso, R. Betti, J. A. Delettrez, O. V. Gotchev, J. P. Knauer, D. D. Meyerhofer, F. J. Marshall, C. Stoeckl, and W. Theobald, Proton radiography of in- ertial fusion implosions, Science 319, 1223 (2008)

    2008

  19. [27]

    F. H. S´ eguin, C. K. Li, M. J.-E. Manuel, H. G. Rinderknecht, N. Sinenian, J. A. Frenje, J. R. Rygg, D. G. Hicks, R. D. Petrasso, J. Delettrez, R. Betti, F. J. Marshall, and V. A. Smalyuk, Time evolution of filamen- tation and self-generated fields in the coronae of directly ...

    2012

  20. [28]

    A. B. Zylstra, J. A. Frenje, P. E. Grabowski, C. K. Li, G. W. Collins, P. Fitzsimmons, S. Glenzer, F. Graziani, S. B. Hansen, S. X. Hu, M. G. Johnson, P. Keiter, H. Reynolds, J. R. Rygg, F. H. S´ eguin, and R. D. Pe- trasso, Development of a wdm platform for charged- particle ...

    2016

  21. [29]

    P. V. Heuer, L. S. Leal, J. R. Davies, E. C. Hansen, D. H. Barnak, J. L. Peebles, F. Garc ´ ıa-Rubio, B. Pollock, J. Moody, A. Birkel, and F. H. Seguin, Diagnosing mag- netic fields in cylindrical implosions with oblique proton radiography, Phys. Plasmas 29, 072708 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    A. B. Zylstra, C. K. Li, H. G. Rinderknecht, F. H. S´ eguin, R. D. Petrasso, C. Stoeckl, D. D. Meyerhofer, P. Nilson, T. C. Sangster, S. L. Pape, A. Mackinnon, and P. Patel, Using high-intensity laser-generated energetic protons to radiograph directly driven implosions, Rev. S...

    2012

  23. [31]

    G. D. Sutcliffe, P. J. Adrian, J. A. Pearcy, T. M. Johnson, J. Kunimune, B. Pollock, J. D. Moody, N. F. Loureiro, and C. K. Li, Observation of electromagnetic filamen- tary structures produced by the weibel instability in laser-driven plasmas, arXiv (2022), arXiv:2209.02565 [p...

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Birdsall and A

    C. Birdsall and A. B. Langdon, Plasma Physics via Com- puter Simulation, 1st ed., Plasma Physics Series (CRC Press, 2004)

    2004

  25. [33]

    Lahmann, A

    B. Lahmann, A. M. Saunders, T. D¨ oppner, J. A. Frenje, S. H. Glenzer, M. Gatu-Johnson, G. Sutcliffe, A. B. Zyl- stra, and R. D. Petrasso, Measuring stopping power in warm dense matter plasmas at omega, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion 65, 095002 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.