pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.28043 · v1 · pith:KK2J4I47new · submitted 2026-06-26 · ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph

On the Relationship Between Plasma and Tritium Fuel Cycle Through Matter Injection and Particle Exhaust

Samuele Meschini , Matteo Moscheni This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 02:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph
keywords tritium fuel cyclefuel puffingdetached plasmatokamakstellaratordirect internal recyclingcore fuelling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Fuel puffing in detached plasmas exceeds core fuelling by an order of magnitude, forcing substantial tritium into the injected gas and invalidating standard tritium fuel cycle assumptions.

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

The paper establishes that gas puffing rates needed to sustain detached operation are roughly ten times higher than the rate at which fuel actually reaches the core for fusion. This ratio, observed from present tokamaks through next-step stellarators, means that tritium must form a large fraction of the puffed gas rather than being confined to core injection. Standard tritium fuel cycle designs that rely on direct internal recycling therefore underestimate tritium throughput, inventory, and breeding demands. The work extends prior models to show that either deuterium-rich puffing or reduced puffing with stronger impurity seeding can restore feasible tritium requirements, at the cost of modest fusion power or higher core contamination. Joint optimisation of core plasma, edge plasma, and tritium cycle is presented as unavoidable.

Core claim

Puffing exceeds core fuelling by about an order of magnitude in detached conditions; therefore tritium must be a substantial component of the puffed fuel. This renders the near-50:50 D:T assumption of direct internal recycling self-defeating and makes tritium inventory, doubling time, required breeding ratio, and pump sizing critical design drivers.

What carries the argument

The measured or modelled ratio of total fuel puffing rate to core fuelling rate in detached plasmas, when inserted into tritium fuel cycle models that previously treated core fuelling as dominant.

If this is right

  • Tritium inventory and throughput rise sharply once puffing is included, affecting breeding ratio and pump sizing.
  • D-rich, T-lean puffing can meet realistic tritium cycle limits at the cost of about 10 percent lower fusion power.
  • Reduced puffing combined with stronger impurity seeding maintains detachment while lowering tritium demands, at the expense of higher core contamination.
  • Combined use of both strategies allows scenarios that minimise tritium inventory and throughput while balancing power and contamination.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Reactor design frameworks that optimise plasma performance first and then size the tritium cycle afterward will systematically understate tritium requirements.
  • The trade-off between edge radiation, core purity, and tritium throughput may set an upper limit on achievable fusion gain that is tighter than core-only calculations suggest.
  • Experimental campaigns on existing devices could test whether impurity-seeded detachment can be sustained at the lower puff rates needed to ease tritium cycle constraints.

Load-bearing premise

The puffing-to-core-fuelling ratio observed in current devices will remain roughly the same under the impurity mixes, pumping, and detached conditions expected in a reactor.

What would settle it

Direct measurement, in a reactor-relevant detached plasma with realistic impurity seeding and pumping, of whether the total injected fuel rate is still an order of magnitude above the core fuelling rate needed for the target fusion power.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.28043 by Matteo Moscheni, Samuele Meschini.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Neon fraction in the core plasma due to imperfect separation, as a function of the particle con￾finement time τp and the separation sharpness SNe, for fDIR = 0.9, τDIR = 10 s, Γ core Ne = 5 × 1020 at s−1 , ne = 1020 m−3 . realistic gas puffing levels are included, however, the difference can be substantial. As the authors of [156] point out, the design proposed is not a point design but gives order of magn… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The conundrum arising from compartmentalised optimisation of plasma operation and the tritium fuel cycle (TFC). In red the specific criticality highlighted in the present work. quantities. The resulting, newly-compiled database is available at [161] and summarised in table 1. Overall 354 entries span 25 machines, correspond￾ing to the subset of devices for which core plasma data could be consistently assem… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Simplified layout of the fuel cycle model. The outer fuel cycle components have been collapsed in a single block. The storage and delivery system (SDS) provides tritium for both the gas puffing and the core fuelling system. of (18) for Γ core T , and the fusion power is adjusted according to the resulting f core T (t → ∞). 6 Results The results are organised around the particle￾balance hierarchy that deter… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Regression of core fuelling rate Γ core Q as a function of total volume Vtot. Data are taken from the newly-compiled database [161]. (b) Regression of fuel puffing rate Γ puff Q as a function of Vtot, with data taken from the original database [130] of [44]. This scaling is computed: discarding linear plasma devices (where divertor volume is undefined); and omitting newly-added devices ARC (AR) [164, 1… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Required TBR and start-up inventory to achieve a doubling time of 2 years as a function of the tritium puff rate. Pfus = 525 MW, corresponding to Γ core T = 9.3×1021 at s−1 . Puffing is performed with 50:50 D:T, that is, Γ puff T = Γpuff Q /2. The puffing range for FPP designs is also depicted, according to the values in table 2. are included into fuel cycle analysis, and illustrate the strategy to find th… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Evolution of the tritium core fraction as a function of Rpuff core and DIR fraction. Core fuelling is ini￾tially performed with 50:50 D:T, while gas puffing with fixed 90:10 D:T. The linestyle encodes the DIR fraction, while the color the ratio between puff rate and fuelling rate. The markers identify the operating conditions used in figure 7. from which pure T is extracted, plus a contribution from the DI… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Top: TBRr and Istart−up for different Rpuff core and fDIR. Both f core T and the normalised fusion power depends on Rpuff core per equations (16) and (17). Gas puff￾ing is performed with 90:10 D:T. Bottom: increase in Istart−up to rebalance the core fuelling mixture. 1.2 1.4 T B R r [-] puff core = 20 puff core = 3 puff core = 1 0 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.90.99 2 4 6 8 Istart u p [k g] 0 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.99 fDIR [-]… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Top: TBRr and Istart−up for different Rpuff core and fDIR. Both f core T and the normalised fusion power depends on Rpuff core per equations (16) and (17). Gas puff￾ing is performed with 75:25 D:T. Bottom: increase in Istart−up to rebalance the core fuelling mixture. 20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a) Regression of impurity seeding rate Γ puff Z∗ = {Γ puff Z,GES, Γ puff Z,Sudo} as a function of total volume Vtot (R 2 = 0.94). The rate Γ puff Z∗ is computed from equa￾tions (11) and (13) of [44]. (b) Comparison between the actual impurity concentration in the outstream c out Z and its semi-empirical reconstruction as a function of Vtot and tritium burning efficiency TBE. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/f… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Regression of effective energy confinement time τE∗ estimated from τIPB98(y,2) in tokamaks [191] and from τISS04 for stellarators [192], as a function of Vtot. Additionally, the exponent remains consistent with figures 11a–11c of [160]. Using the fact that the effective density limit n∗ does not increase systematically with machine size across the database11 (∼ 1.3×1020 m−3 on average), substitution into … view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Illustrative staged-operation strategy. An initial impurity-dominated detached phase with reduced tritium puffing demand allows partial saturation of fuel cycle inventories. After this transient, the reactor can switch to a more fuel-dominated D:T puffing with a substantially milder tritium inventory drop than would occur under direct start-up in that regime. The radi￾ation fraction shown in the plot is c… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Simplified hydraulic network for a pump￾bypass loop alike [217, 218, 73, 119], as devised by Ig￾itkhanov et al. [219] to favour the tritium fuel cycle. Only fuel puffing and impurity seeding are included for the sake of simplicity. puffing by passive internal recirculation. In puff￾dominated regimes (Rpuff core ≫ 1), to leading order Γ puff Q ∝ (1 − fbp). Despite this apparent simplicity, several discus￾s… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This work identifies an inconsistency between plasma operating scenarios and tritium fuel cycle (TFC) requirements, calling for a re-examination of the traditional reactor-led design approach. The key point is simple: in current TFC architectures, fuel puffing must contain tritium. Moscheni et al. (2026 Nucl. Fusion 66 026008) investigated fuel puffing rates in detached operation. Expanding that database, puffing is shown to exceed core fuelling by about an order of magnitude, from present-day tokamaks to next-step stellarators. Though not unknown in the plasma community, TFC models instead assumed core fuelling to dominate. The implications are severe. In recent TFC architectures, direct internal recycling (DIR) is intended to minimise tritium inventory, but assumes near-50:50 D:T composition. This assumption may become self-defeating: a substantial fraction of the puffed fuel must be tritium. Tritium inventory, doubling time, required breeding ratio, and pump sizing therefore become critical once puffing is properly accounted for. Mitigation is assessed by extending the models of Meschini et al. (2023 Nucl. Fusion 63 126005). For a notional plant, realistic TFC requirements can be met with D-rich, T-lean puffing, at the cost of about 10% lower fusion power. Alternatively, for near-50:50 D:T puffing, reduced fuel puffing with stronger impurity seeding can maintain detachment while alleviating TFC constraints, albeit with higher core contamination. Combined use of these strategies enables scenarios that minimise tritium inventory and throughput while balancing competing requirements. Ultimately, these results place renewed emphasis on the TFC as a central element of reactor design. A viable fusion reactor requires joint optimisation of core plasma, edge plasma, and TFC, implying unavoidable trade-offs across all three.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that expanding the fuel-puffing database of Moscheni et al. (2026) shows puffing rates exceed core fuelling by roughly an order of magnitude from present tokamaks to next-step stellarators; this contradicts TFC models (extended from Meschini et al. 2023) that assume core fuelling dominates. The resulting need for substantial tritium in the puff stream undermines the 50:50 D:T assumption of direct internal recycling, inflating tritium inventory, doubling time, breeding ratio and pump sizing. Two mitigation paths are assessed: D-rich/T-lean puffing at ~10% fusion-power cost, or reduced puffing plus stronger impurity seeding; their combination is said to allow acceptable TFC parameters.

Significance. If the reported puffing-to-core ratio and its extrapolation to reactor-relevant detached regimes prove robust, the work correctly identifies an under-appreciated coupling between edge-plasma operation and TFC architecture that has been treated separately in prior design studies. The explicit quantification of the resulting TFC penalties and the two concrete mitigation strategies supply a falsifiable starting point for integrated modelling.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract, §3] Abstract and §3 (database expansion): the central claim that puffing exceeds core fuelling by a factor of ~10 rests on an expanded version of the Moscheni et al. (2026) database, yet the manuscript provides neither the additional data points, the fitting procedure, nor error bars on the ratio; without these the load-bearing numerical factor cannot be independently assessed.
  2. [§4] §4 (TFC extension): the 10% fusion-power penalty quoted for D-rich puffing is obtained by extending the Meschini et al. (2023) model, but the manuscript does not report the modified equations, the updated parameter values, or the sensitivity of the penalty to the assumed impurity mix and pumping scheme.
  3. [§5] §5 (reactor extrapolation): the assertion that the observed ratio persists under reactor-relevant detached conditions with the impurity seeding and pumping schemes of the TFC model is stated without a dedicated sensitivity study; changes in SOL transport or detachment-front location could alter the ratio and thereby weaken the inconsistency claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§3] Notation for the puffing-to-core ratio is introduced without an explicit equation number; adding Eq. (X) would improve traceability.
  2. [Figures 2–4] Figure captions should state the device set and the exact definition of “core fuelling” used in each panel.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments correctly identify gaps in the presentation of supporting data and analyses. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, §3] Abstract and §3 (database expansion): the central claim that puffing exceeds core fuelling by a factor of ~10 rests on an expanded version of the Moscheni et al. (2026) database, yet the manuscript provides neither the additional data points, the fitting procedure, nor error bars on the ratio; without these the load-bearing numerical factor cannot be independently assessed.

    Authors: We agree that the expanded Moscheni et al. (2026) database, the fitting procedure establishing the ~10x ratio, and error bars are not provided in the current manuscript. This limits independent assessment of the central numerical claim. In the revised version we will add the additional data points (tabulated or plotted), describe the fitting procedure used to quantify the puffing-to-core ratio across the database, and report error bars derived from data scatter and measurement uncertainties. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] §4 (TFC extension): the 10% fusion-power penalty quoted for D-rich puffing is obtained by extending the Meschini et al. (2023) model, but the manuscript does not report the modified equations, the updated parameter values, or the sensitivity of the penalty to the assumed impurity mix and pumping scheme.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the model extension details are missing. The 10% fusion-power penalty is obtained from the extended Meschini et al. (2023) TFC model, yet the modified equations, specific parameter values for the notional plant, and sensitivity to impurity mix or pumping scheme are not reported. In revision we will include the updated equations, the parameter set used, and a sensitivity study showing how the penalty varies with impurity mix and pumping assumptions. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§5] §5 (reactor extrapolation): the assertion that the observed ratio persists under reactor-relevant detached conditions with the impurity seeding and pumping schemes of the TFC model is stated without a dedicated sensitivity study; changes in SOL transport or detachment-front location could alter the ratio and thereby weaken the inconsistency claim.

    Authors: The extrapolation relies on the database spanning detached operation from present tokamaks to next-step stellarators, but we agree that a dedicated sensitivity study on SOL transport and detachment-front location is absent. While the existing database already samples a range of detached conditions, to address the concern we will add a sensitivity analysis in the revised manuscript exploring the impact of plausible variations in SOL transport and detachment location on the puffing-to-core ratio. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Central quantitative claim and TFC extension rely on self-citations to overlapping authors' prior modeling

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Abstract]
    "Moscheni et al. (2026 Nucl. Fusion 66 026008) investigated fuel puffing rates in detached operation. Expanding that database, puffing is shown to exceed core fuelling by about an order of magnitude, from present-day tokamaks to next-step stellarators. [...] Mitigation is assessed by extending the models of Meschini et al. (2023 Nucl. Fusion 63 126005)."

    The load-bearing quantitative premise (order-of-magnitude puffing excess) and the TFC analysis framework are justified solely by citations to prior publications whose authors overlap with the present paper. The inconsistency between plasma scenarios and TFC requirements therefore inherits modeling assumptions from those self-cited works rather than resting on independent external data or a new derivation within this manuscript.

full rationale

The paper's key result (puffing exceeds core fuelling by ~10x) is obtained by expanding a database from the authors' own 2026 work, while mitigation strategies extend their 2023 TFC model. This makes the inconsistency identification load-bearing on self-citations. However, the paper performs new synthesis and proposes mitigations with independent analytical content rather than reducing any derivation to the inputs by construction. No self-definitional, fitted-prediction, or ansatz patterns are exhibited. The self-citation is therefore noted but does not force the result or eliminate independent value, consistent with a moderate score.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the abstract; the work inherits modeling assumptions from the two cited prior papers without enumerating them here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5873 in / 1235 out tokens · 37765 ms · 2026-06-29T02:06:17.859406+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Harnessing Toroidal Neutral Flows to Enhance Divertor Particle Exhaust

    physics.plasm-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Toroidally oriented pump inlets reduce back-flow by up to 20% (deuterium) and 33% (helium) and enhance partial pressures by factors of 1.78 and 2.00 in DSMC simulations of plasma-imprinted neutral winds.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

275 extracted references · 105 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    BLUE- PRINT: A novel approach to fusion re- actor design,

    M. Coleman and S. McIntosh, “BLUE- PRINT: A novel approach to fusion re- actor design,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 139, pp. 26–38, 2019. [On- line]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0920379618308019

    2019

  2. [2]

    FUSE (Fusion Synthesis Engine): A Next Generation Framework for Integrated Design of Fusion Pilot Plants,

    O. Meneghini, T. Slendebroek, B. Lyons, K. McLaughlin, J. McClenaghan, L. Stagner, J. Harvey, T. Neiser, A. Ghiozzi, G. Dose, J. Guterl, A. Zalzali, T. Cote, N. Shi, D. Weisberg, S. Smith, B. Grierson, and J. Candy, “FUSE (Fusion Synthesis Engine): A Next Generation Framework for Integrated Design of Fusion Pilot Plants,”arXiv, 2024. [Online]. Available: ...

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    “PROCESS

    M. Kovari, F. Fox, C. Harrington, R. Kembleton, P. Knight, H. Lux, and J. Morris, ““PROCESS”: A sys- tems code for fusion power plants–Part 2: Engineering,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 104, pp. 9–20, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/abs/pii/S0920379616300072

    2016

  4. [4]

    An ad- vanced computational algorithm for sys- tems analysis of tokamak power plants,

    Z. Dragojlovic, A. Rene Raffray, F. Na- jmabadi, C. Kessel, L. Waganer, L. El- Guebaly, and L. Bromberg, “An ad- vanced computational algorithm for sys- tems analysis of tokamak power plants,” Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 243–265, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379610000414

    2010

  5. [5]

    Efforts towards improvement of systems codes for the Broader Approach DEMO design,

    M. Nakamura, R. Kemp, H. Utoh, D. J. Ward, K. Tobita, R. Hiwatari, and G. Fe- derici, “Efforts towards improvement of systems codes for the Broader Approach DEMO design,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 87, no. 5, pp. 864–867, 2012, tenth International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology (ISFNT-10). [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com...

    2012

  6. [6]

    bluemira,

    M. Coleman, J. Cook, F. Franza, I. Maione, S. McIntosh, J. Morris, D. Short, A. Blair, M. Bluteau, H. Brookset al., “bluemira,” Zenodo, 2025. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19385066

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.19385066 2025

  7. [7]

    Plasma physics for fusion re- actor system codes: Framework and model code,

    E. Fable, C. Angioni, M. Siccinio, and H. Zohm, “Plasma physics for fusion re- actor system codes: Framework and model code,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 130, pp. 131–136, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379618302801

    2018

  8. [8]

    DEMO reactor design using the new modular system code SYCOMORE,

    C. Reux, L. Di Gallo, F. Imbeaux, J.-F. Artaud, P. Bernardi, J. Bucalossi, G. Ciraolo, J.-L. Duchateau, C. Fausser, D. Galassi, P. Hertout, J.-C. Jaboulay, A. Li-Puma, B. Saoutic, L. Zani, and I.-T. Contributors, “DEMO reactor design using the new modular system code SYCOMORE,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 55, no. 7, p. 073011, jun 2015. [Online]. Available: https...

    2015

  9. [9]

    On the implementation of new technology modules for fusion re- actor systems codes,

    F. Franza, L. Boccaccini, U. Fisher, P. Gade, and R. Heller, “On the implementation of new technology modules for fusion re- actor systems codes,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 98-99, pp. 1767–1770, 2015, proceedings of the 28th Symposium On Fusion Technology (SOFT-28). [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379615001933

    2015

  10. [10]

    Development of a tokamak re- actor system code and its application for concept development of a demo reactor,

    B. G. Hong, D. W. Lee, S.-K. Kim, and Y. Kim, “Development of a tokamak re- actor system code and its application for concept development of a demo reactor,” Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 83, no. 10, pp. 1615–1618, 2008, proceed- ings of the Eight International Symposium of Fusion Nuclear Technology. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.co...

    2008

  11. [11]

    SOLPS-ITER modelling of helium transport, recycling and pumping at the ASDEX Upgrade toka- mak,

    A. Zito, O. Pan, M. Wischmeier, A. Kapp- atou, A. Kallenbach, S. Makarov, M. Bernert, M. Cavedon, D. Reiter, U. Stroth, and the ASDEX Upgrade Team, “SOLPS-ITER modelling of helium transport, recycling and pumping at the ASDEX Upgrade toka- mak,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 65, no. 4, p. 046022, mar 2025. [Online]. Available: https: //dx.doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/adbe90

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/adbe90 2025

  12. [12]

    Effect of neutral screening on pump- ing efficiency in the DEMO divertor,

    S. Varoutis, Y. Igitkhanov, and C. Day, “Effect of neutral screening on pump- ing efficiency in the DEMO divertor,” Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 146, pp. 1741–1746, Sep. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379619303515 44

    2019

  13. [13]

    3D numerical study of neutral gas dynamics in the DTT particle exhaust using the DSMC method,

    C. Tantos, S. Varoutis, V. Hauer, C. Day, and P. Innocente, “3D numerical study of neutral gas dynamics in the DTT particle exhaust using the DSMC method,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 64, no. 1, p. 016019, nov 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1741-4326/ad0c80

    2023

  14. [14]

    Review of blanket designs for advanced fusion reactors,

    T. Ihli, T. Basu, L. Giancarli, S. Kon- ishi, S. Malang, F. Najmabadi, S. Nishio, A. Raffray, C. Rao, A. Sagara, and Y. Wu, “Review of blanket designs for advanced fusion reactors,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 83, no. 7, pp. 912–919, 2008, proceedings of the Eight International Sym- posium of Fusion Nuclear Technology. [On- line]. Available: https:...

    2008

  15. [15]

    Dy- namic thermal-hydraulic modelling of the eu demo hcpb breeding blanket cool- ing loops,

    A. Froio, C. Bachmann, F. Cismondi, L. Savoldi, and R. Zanino, “Dy- namic thermal-hydraulic modelling of the eu demo hcpb breeding blanket cool- ing loops,”Progress in Nuclear Energy, vol. 93, pp. 116–132, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S014919701630186X

    2016

  16. [16]

    Materials chal- lenges for the fusion nuclear science fa- cility,

    A. Rowcliffe, L. Garrison, Y. Yamamoto, L. Tan, and Y. Katoh, “Materials chal- lenges for the fusion nuclear science fa- cility,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 135, pp. 290–301, 2018, spe- cial Issue: FESS-FNSF Study. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379617307524

    2018

  17. [17]

    DEMO structural materials qualification and development,

    M. Gorley, G. Aiello, J. Henry, T. Nozawa, G. Pintsuk, M. Rieth, and H. Tanigawa, “DEMO structural materials qualification and development,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 170, p. 112513, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379621002891

    2021

  18. [18]

    EU DEMO Remote Maintenance System development during the Pre-Concept Design Phase,

    O. Crofts, A. Loving, M. Torrance, S. Bud- den, B. Drumm, T. Tremethick, D. Chauvin, M. Siuko, W. Brace, V. Milushev, M. Mit- twollen, T. Lehmann, F. Rauscher, G. Fisc- her, P. Pagani, Y. Wang, C. Baars, and A. Vale, “EU DEMO Remote Maintenance System development during the Pre-Concept Design Phase,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 179, p. 113121, 2022...

    2022

  19. [19]

    The ITER remote maintenance system,

    A. Tesini and J. Palmer, “The ITER remote maintenance system,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 83, no. 7, pp. 810–816, 2008, proceedings of the Eight International Sym- posium of Fusion Nuclear Technology. [On- line]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S092037960800255X

    2008

  20. [20]

    The European roadmap towards fusion electricity,

    A. Donné, “The European roadmap towards fusion electricity,”Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 377, p. 2141, 2019. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2017.0432

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2017.0432 2019

  21. [21]

    Benefits and Chal- lenges of Advanced Divertor Configura- tions in DEMO,

    R. Kembleton, M. Siccinio, F. Maviglia, and F. Militello, “Benefits and Chal- lenges of Advanced Divertor Configura- tions in DEMO,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 179, p. 113120, 2022. [On- line]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S092037962200120X

    2022

  22. [22]

    Isolating the impacts of divertor closure on fueling and detachment with simpli- fied SOLPS-ITER simulations of MAST- U,

    C. Cowley, D. Moulton, and B. Lipschultz, “Isolating the impacts of divertor closure on fueling and detachment with simpli- fied SOLPS-ITER simulations of MAST- U,”Physics of Plasmas, vol. 33, no. 2, p. 022508, 02 2026. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0271055

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0271055 2026

  23. [23]

    Assessment of DEMO challenges in technology and physics,

    H. Zohm, “Assessment of DEMO challenges in technology and physics,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 88, no. 6, pp. 428–433, 2013, proceedings of the 27th Symposium On Fusion Technology (SOFT-27); Liège, Belgium, September 24-28, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379613000021

    2013

  24. [24]

    Physics conclusions in support of ITER W divertor monoblock shaping,

    R. Pitts, S. Bardin, B. Bazylev, M. van den Berg, P. Bunting, S. Carpentier-Chouchana, J. Coenen, Y. Corre, R. Dejarnac, F. Escour- biac, J. Gaspar, J. Gunn, T. Hirai, S.-H. Hong, J. Horacek, D. Iglesias, M. Komm, K. Krieger, C. Lasnier, G. Matthews, T. Morgan, S. Panayotis, S. Pestchanyi, A. Podolnik, R. Nygren, D. Rudakov, G. De Temmerman, P. Vondracek,...

    2017

  25. [25]

    Power exhaust in tokamaks and scenario integration is- sues,

    A. Loarte and R. Neu, “Power exhaust in tokamaks and scenario integration is- sues,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 122, pp. 256–273, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S092037961730724X

    2017

  26. [26]

    Physics basis for the first ITER tung- sten divertor,

    R. Pitts, X. Bonnin, F. Escourbiac, H. Frerichs, J. Gunn, T. Hirai, A. Kukushkin, E. Kaveeva, M. Miller, D. Moulton, V. Rozhansky, I. Senichenkov, E. Sytova, O. Schmitz, P. Stangeby, G. De Tem- merman, I. Veselova, and S. Wiesen, “Physics basis for the first ITER tung- sten divertor,”Nuclear Materials and En- ergy, vol. 20, p. 100696, 2019. [Online]. Avai...

    2019

  27. [27]

    A 43 Software Package for Plasma-Facing Com- ponent Analysis and Design: The Heat Flux Engineering Analysis Toolkit (HEAT),

    B. Ploeckl, P. T. Lang, A. Frattolillo, Y. Igitkhanov, B. Pégourié, E. Fable, C. Day, and C. Gliss, “Matter Injection in EU- DEMO: The Preconceptual Design,”Fusion Science and Technology, vol. 77, no. 4, pp. 266–278, 2021. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1080/15361055.2021.1903784

    work page doi:10.1080/15361055.2021.1903784 2021

  28. [28]

    Neutral recirculation—the key to control of divertor operation,

    A. Kukushkin and H. Pacher, “Neutral recirculation—the key to control of divertor operation,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 56, no. 12, p. 126012, sep 2016. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1088/0029-5515/56/12/126012

    work page doi:10.1088/0029-5515/56/12/126012 2016

  29. [29]

    On benchmarking of simulations of particle transport in ITER,

    Y.-S. Na, F. Koechl, A. Polevoi, C. Byun, D. Na, J. Seo, F. Felici, A. Fukuyama, J. Garcia, N. Hayashi, C. Kessel, T. Luce, J. Park, F. Poli, O. Sauter, A. Sips, P. Strand, A. Teplukhina, I. Voitsekhovitch, A. Wisitsorasak, X. Yuan, and T. I. T. G. on Integrated Operation Scenarios, “On benchmarking of simulations of particle transport in ITER,”Nuclear Fu...

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ab15e0 2019

  30. [30]

    Scaling of ITER diver- tor parameters – interpolation from 2D modelling and extrapolation,

    H. Pacher, A. Kukushkin, G. Pacher, and G. Janeschitz, “Scaling of ITER diver- tor parameters – interpolation from 2D modelling and extrapolation,”Journal of Nuclear Materials, vol. 313-316, pp. 657– 663, 2003, Plasma-Surface Interactions in Controlled Fusion Devices 15. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0022311502013740

    2003

  31. [31]

    Evaluation of fuelling requirements for core density and divertor heat load control in non-stationary phases of the ITER DT 15 MA baseline scenario,

    F. Koechl, R. Ambrosino, P. Belo, M. Cav- inato, G. Corrigan, L. Garzotti, D. Harting, A. Kukushkin, A. Loarte, M. Mattei, E. Militello-Asp, V. Parail, M. Romanelli, G. Saibene, and R. Sartori, “Evaluation of fuelling requirements for core density and divertor heat load control in non-stationary phases of the ITER DT 15 MA baseline scenario,”Nuclear Fusio...

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ab7c2c 2020

  32. [32]

    Effect of the tokamak size in edge transport modelling and im- plications for DEMO,

    H. Pacher, A. Kukushkin, G. Pacher, G. Janeschitz, D. Coster, V. Kotov, and D. Reiter, “Effect of the tokamak size in edge transport modelling and im- plications for DEMO,”Journal of Nuc- lear Materials, vol. 363-365, pp. 400–406, 2007, plasma-Surface Interactions-17. [On- line]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0022311507000797

    2007

  33. [33]

    Overview of the third JET deuterium-tritium campaign,

    A. Kappatou, M. Baruzzo, A. Hakola, E. Joffrin, D. Keeling, B. Labit, E. Tsitrone, N. Vianello, M. Wischmeier, I. Balboa, J. Bernardo, M. Bernert, T. Bosman, S. Brezinsek, D. Brida, I. S. Carvalho, P. Carvalho, L. Ceelen, C. D. Challis, I. Coffey, T. Dittmar, M. Dunne, M. Faitsch, A. R. Field, L. Frassinetti, L. Garzotti, Z. Ghani, C. Giroud, S. Henderson...

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6587/adbd75 2025

  34. [34]

    Overview of deuterium-tritium nuc- lear operations at JET,

    R. Villari, X. Litaudon, J. Mailloux, M. Dentan, N. Fonnesu, Z. Ghani, L. Packer, F. Rimini, R. Vila, R. Afanasenko, J. Algua- cil, P. Batistoni, P. Beaumont, S. Bradnam, P. Carman, J. Catalan, M. Cecchetto, A. Colangeli, D. Croft, J. Cufe, M. De Pietri, M. Fabbri, J. Figueiredo, D. Flammini, 46 C. Grove, A. Hjalmarsson, V. Ioannou- Sougleridis, L. Jones,...

    2025

  35. [35]

    Deuterium and tritium experiments on TFTR,

    J. D. Strachan, H. Adler, C. W. Barnes, S. Batha, M. G. Bell, R. Bell, M. Bitter, N. L. Bretz, R. Budny, C. E. Bush, M. Caorlin, Z. Chang, D. S. Darrow, H. Duong, R. Durst, P. C. Efthimion, R. Fisher, R. J. Fonck, E. Fredrickson, B. Grek, L. R. Grisham, G. Hammett, R. J. Hawryiuk, W. Heidbrink, H. W. Herrmann, K. W. Hill, J. Hosea, H. Hsuan, A. Janos, D. ...

    work page doi:10.1088/0741-3335/36/12b/001 1994

  36. [36]

    Tritium reserves and supply for commercial fusion deployment,

    S. Meschini, “Tritium reserves and supply for commercial fusion deployment,”Submitted to Nuclear Fusion, 2026

    2026

  37. [37]

    Plasma Physics and Technology Aspects of the Deuterium–Tritium Fuel Cycle for Fusion Energy: Summary of a Tech- nical Meeting,

    International Atomic Energy Agency, “Plasma Physics and Technology Aspects of the Deuterium–Tritium Fuel Cycle for Fusion Energy: Summary of a Tech- nical Meeting,” International Atomic En- ergy Agency (IAEA), Vienna, Austria, Tech. Rep. IAEA-TECDOC-2049, 2024. [On- line]. Available: https://www-pub.iaea.org/ MTCD/Publications/PDF/TE-2049web.pdf

    2049

  38. [38]

    A smart three-loop fuel cycle architecture for DEMO,

    C. Day, B. Butler, T. Giegerich, B. Ploeckl, and S. Varoutis, “A smart three-loop fuel cycle architecture for DEMO,”Fu- sion Engineering and Design, vol. 146, pp. 2462–2468, Sep. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0920379619305538

    2019

  39. [39]

    Tritium burn efficiency in deuterium–tritium magnetic fu- sion,

    D. G. Whyte, R. Delaporte-Mathurin, S. E. Ferry, and S. Meschini, “Tritium burn efficiency in deuterium–tritium magnetic fu- sion,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 63, no. 12, p. 126019, Sep. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/acf3fb

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/acf3fb 2023

  40. [40]

    Modeling helium compression and enrichment in DIII-D edge plasmas using the SOLPS-ITER code,

    R. Masline and D. Whyte, “Modeling helium compression and enrichment in DIII-D edge plasmas using the SOLPS-ITER code,” Jun. 2025, arXiv:2506.17468 [physics]. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.17468

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Analysis and modelling of Inner Fuel Cycle performance using exhaust bypass and Direct Internal Recycling,

    F. Hattab, Y. Igitkhanov, V. Narcisi, A. San- tucci, F. Giannetti, G. V. Centomani, P. A. Staniec, R. Kembleton, and T. Giegerich, “Analysis and modelling of Inner Fuel Cycle performance using exhaust bypass and Direct Internal Recycling,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 225, p. 115668, Apr. 2026. [On- line]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect. com/s...

    2026

  42. [42]

    Ad- vances in fuel cycle modeling and analysis,

    S. Meschini, G. Ferrero, R. Delaporte- Mathurin, G. Iob, A. Morandi, G. Centomani, R. Testoni, G. Tynan, and S. Ferry, “Ad- vances in fuel cycle modeling and analysis,” in2025 Symposium on Fu- sion Engineering, Boston, MA, USA, Jul. 2025. [Online]. Available: https:// airdrive.eventsair.com/eventsairsthcusprod/ production-plasmafusion-public/ 399c47fcd9f4...

    2025

  43. [43]

    Modeling fueling and divertor pupmping to quantify tritium burn efficiency in transient conditions,

    A. Morandi, S. Meschini, and R. Testoni, “Modeling fueling and divertor pupmping to quantify tritium burn efficiency in transient conditions,” in2025 Simposium 47 on Fusion Engineering, Boston, MA, USA, 2025. [Online]. Available: https:// airdrive.eventsair.com/eventsairsthcusprod/ production-plasmafusion-public/ 399c47fcd9f447d18e0955a5b1baae52

    2025

  44. [44]

    Multi-machine scaling laws for fuel and impurity puffing rates sufficient for detachment access: a systematic review of magnetic confinement fusion devices,

    M. Moscheni, A. Herrmann, R. Kembleton, M. Kryjak, S. Lazerson, F. Levi, M. Siccinio, P. Staniec, T. Giegerich, C. Tantos, and t. G. Fusion Team, “Multi-machine scaling laws for fuel and impurity puffing rates sufficient for detachment access: a systematic review of magnetic confinement fusion devices,” Nuclear Fusion, vol. 66, no. 2, p. 026008, dec

  45. [45]

    Available: https://doi.org/10

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10. 1088/1741-4326/ae287c

  46. [46]

    An over- view of the STEP divertor design and the simple models driving the plasma exhaust scenario,

    S. Henderson, R. Osawa, S. Newton, D. Moulton, L. Xiang, R. Futtersack, M. Kry- jak, C. Ridgers, J. Karhunen, A. Jarvinen, A. Hudoba, S. Bakes, F. Eriksson, H. Meyer, M. Lord, A. Tarazona, A. Cureton, A. Barth, B. Chuilon, T. Hebrard, S. Wang, Z. Vizvary, D. Vaccaro, F. Perez Smith, J. Farrington, J. Harrison, B. Dudson, and B. Lipschultz, “An overview of...

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ad93e7 2024

  47. [47]

    Physicsandtechno- logy considerations for the deuterium–tritium fuel cycle and conditions for tritium fuel self sufficiency,

    M. Abdou, M. Riva, A. Ying, C. Day, A. Loarte, L. R. Baylor, P. Humrickhouse, T.F.Fuerst, andS.Cho, “Physicsandtechno- logy considerations for the deuterium–tritium fuel cycle and conditions for tritium fuel self sufficiency,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 61, no. 1, p. 013001, Nov. 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //dx.doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/abbf35

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/abbf35 2020

  48. [48]

    Modeling and analysis of the tritium fuel cycle for ARC- and STEP-class D-T fusion power plants,

    S. Meschini, S. E. Ferry, R. Delaporte- Mathurin, and D. G. Whyte, “Modeling and analysis of the tritium fuel cycle for ARC- and STEP-class D-T fusion power plants,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 63, no. 12, p. 126005, Sep. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/acf3fc

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/acf3fc 2023

  49. [49]

    Breeder blanket and tritium fuel cycle feasibility of the Infinity Two Fusion Pilot Plant,

    D. W. S. Clark, B. Goh, S. Ramirez, E. Pflug, J. Smandych, J. R. Kessing, C. Moreno, T. D. Bohm, P. P. H. Wilson, L. Singh, A. Cerfon, N. R. Mandell, J. C. Schmitt, W. Guttenfelder, C. Lau, M. S. Tillack, and J. M. Canik, “Breeder blanket and tritium fuel cycle feasibility of the Infinity Two Fusion Pilot Plant,”Journal of Plasma Physics, pp. 1–48, Mar. 2...

    2025

  50. [50]

    Cfedr tritium fuel cycle model and tritium self-sufficiency analysis,

    C. Jin, X. Zhang, L. Gui, Y. Jiang, and S. Zheng, “Cfedr tritium fuel cycle model and tritium self-sufficiency analysis,”Fusion En- gineering and Design, vol. 228, p. 115766, 2026

    2026

  51. [51]

    Divertor heat flux reduction by D2 injection in DIII-D,

    T. Petrie, D. Buchenauer, D. Hill, C. Klepper, S. Allen, R. Campbell, A. Futch, R. Groebner, A. Leonard, S. Lippmann, M. Ali Mahdavi, M. Rensink, and P. West, “Divertor heat flux reduction by D2 injection in DIII-D,” Journal of Nuclear Materials, vol. 196-198, pp. 848–853, 1992, plasma-Surface Interac- tions in Controlled Fusion Devices. [Online]. Availab...

    1992

  52. [52]

    Pellet Core Fuel- ing in Tokamaks, Stellarators and Reversed Field Pinches,

    E. Geulin and B. Pégourié, “Pellet Core Fuel- ing in Tokamaks, Stellarators and Reversed Field Pinches,”Plasma and Fusion Research, vol. 17, pp. 2102101–2102101, 2022. [On- line]. Available: https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/ article/pfr/17/0/17_2102101/_article

    2022

  53. [53]

    A comparison of the influ- ence of plasmoid-drift mechanisms on plasma fuelling by cryogenic pellets in ITER and Wendelstein 7-X,

    N. Panadero, F. Koechl, A. Polevoi, J. Baldzuhn, C. Beidler, P. Lang, A. Loarte, A. Matsuyama, K. McCarthy, B. Pégourié, and Y. Turkin, “A comparison of the influ- ence of plasmoid-drift mechanisms on plasma fuelling by cryogenic pellets in ITER and Wendelstein 7-X,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 63, no.4, p.046022, mar2023.[Online].Available: https://doi.org/10.10...

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/acbc34

  54. [54]

    Fuelling of deuterium–tritium plasma by peripheral pellets in JET experiments,

    M. Valovič, S. Aleiferis, P. Blatchford, A. Boboc, M. Brix, P. Carvalho, I. Carvalho, M. Fontdecaba Climent, D. Dunai, L. Frass- inetti, L. Garzotti, F. Köchl, J. Lowry, E. de la Luna, C. Maggi, R. Morales, S. Nowak, C. Olde, D. Réfy, F. Rimini, S. Silburn, Z. Stancar, G. Tvalashvili, M. Vecsei, and the JET Contributors, “Fuelling of deuterium–tritium pla...

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ad42b2 2024

  55. [55]

    ELM control at the L→H transition by means of pellet pacing in the ASDEX Upgrade and JET all-metal-wall tokamaks,

    P. T. Lang, H. Meyer, G. Birkenmeier, A. Burckhart, I. S. Carvalho, E. Delabie, L. Frassinetti, G. Huijsmans, G. Kocsis, A. Loarte, C. F. Maggi, M. Maraschek, 48 B. Ploeckl, F. Rimini, F. Ryter, S. Saarelma, T. Szepesi, E. Wolfrum, A. U. Team, and J. Contributors, “ELM control at the L→H transition by means of pellet pacing in the ASDEX Upgrade and JET al...

    work page doi:10.1088/0741-3335/57/4/045011 2015

  56. [56]

    Pellet triggering of edge loc- alized modes in low collisionality pedestals at DIII-D,

    R. Wilcox, L. Baylor, A. Bortolon, M. Knolker, C. Lasnier, D. Shiraki, I. Bykov, C. Chrystal, F. Scotti, C. Paz-Soldan, and A. Wingen, “Pellet triggering of edge loc- alized modes in low collisionality pedestals at DIII-D,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 62, no. 2, p. 026017, dec 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/ac3b8b

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ac3b8b 2021

  57. [57]

    Overview of the design of the ITER heating neutral beam injectors,

    R. S. Hemsworth, D. Boilson, P. Blatchford, M. D. Palma, G. Chitarin, H. P. L. de Esch, F. Geli, M. Dremel, J. Graceffa, D. Marcuzzi, G. Serianni, D. Shah, M. Singh, M. Urbani, and P. Zaccaria, “Overview of the design of the ITER heating neutral beam injectors,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 19, no. 2, p. 025005, feb 2017. [Online]. Available: https: //doi...

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/19/2/025005 2017

  58. [58]

    Heating neutral beams for ITER: negative ion sources to tune fusion plasmas,

    M. J. Singh, D. Boilson, A. R. Polevoi, T. Oikawa, and R. Mitteau, “Heating neutral beams for ITER: negative ion sources to tune fusion plasmas,”New Journal of Physics, vol. 19, no. 5, p. 055004, may 2017. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1367-2630/aa639d

    2017

  59. [59]

    Overview of neutral beam injectors for plasma heating and diagnostics developed at Budker INP,

    I. Shikhovtsev, A. Ivanov, V. Davydenko, Y. Belchenko, G. Abdrashitov, V. Belov, T. Akhmetov, V. Amirov, A. Brul, P. Deichuli, and et al., “Overview of neutral beam injectors for plasma heating and diagnostics developed at Budker INP,” Journal of Plasma Physics, vol. 90, no. 1, p. 155900301, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journa...

    2024

  60. [60]

    Peridynamic modelling of cryogenic deuterium pellet fragmentation for shattered pellet injection in toka- maks,

    S.-J. Lee, E. Madenci, Y.-S. Na, P. de Marné, M. Dibon, P. Heinrich, S. Jachmich, G. Papp, T. Peherstorfer, and the ASDEX Up- grade Team, “Peridynamic modelling of cryogenic deuterium pellet fragmentation for shattered pellet injection in toka- maks,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 64, no. 10, p. 106023, aug 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-43...

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ad69a3 2024

  61. [61]

    Partial detachment of high power discharges in ASDEX Upgrade,

    A. Kallenbach, M. Bernert, M. Beurskens, L. Casali, M. Dunne, T. Eich, L. Giannone, A. Herrmann, M. Maraschek, S. Potzel, F. Reimold, V. Rohde, J. Schweinzer, E. Viezzer, M. Wischmeier, and the ASDEX Upgrade Team, “Partial detachment of high power discharges in ASDEX Upgrade,”Nuc- lear Fusion, vol. 55, no. 5, p. 053026, apr

  62. [62]

    Available: https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1088/0029-5515/55/5/053026

    [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1088/0029-5515/55/5/053026

    work page doi:10.1088/0029-5515/55/5/053026

  63. [63]

    Core transport modelling of the DTT full power scenario using different fuelling strategies,

    B.Baiocchi, L.Aucone, I.Casiraghi, L.Figini, F. Koechl, and P. Mantica, “Core transport modelling of the DTT full power scenario using different fuelling strategies,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 63, no. 10, p. 106009, aug 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1741-4326/acef3b

    2023

  64. [64]

    Pellet- Injector Technology—Brief History and Key Developments in the Last 25 Years,

    S. K. Combs and L. R. Baylor, “Pellet- Injector Technology—Brief History and Key Developments in the Last 25 Years,”Fusion Science and Technology, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 493–518, May 2018. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1080/15361055.2017.1421367

    work page doi:10.1080/15361055.2017.1421367 2018

  65. [65]

    Comparison of fueling efficiency from different fueling locations on DIII-D,

    L. R. Baylor, T. C. Jernigan, R. J. Colchin, G. L. Jackson, L. W. Owen, and T. W. Petrie, “Comparison of fueling efficiency from different fueling locations on DIII-D,” Journal of Nuclear Materials, vol. 313-316, no. SUPPL., pp. 530–533, 2003. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/abs/pii/S0022311502014563

    2003

  66. [66]

    Observation of a reduced-turbulence regime with boron powder injection in a stellarator,

    F. Nespoli, S. Masuzaki, K. Tanakaet al., “Observation of a reduced-turbulence regime with boron powder injection in a stellarator,” Nature Physics, vol. 18, pp. 350–356, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41567-021-01460-4

    2022

  67. [67]

    Using rational surfaces to improve pellet fuelling in stellarators,

    N. Panadero, K. McCarthy, B. Pégourié, R. Carrasco, I. García-Cortés, R. García, J. Hernández-Sánchez, F. Köchl, J. Martínez- Fernández, R. Sakamotoet al., “Using rational surfaces to improve pellet fuelling in stellarators,”Journal of Plasma Physics, vol. 89, no. 6, p. 955890601, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.cambridge.org/core/ journals/journal...

    2023

  68. [68]

    Considerations on the DEMO pellet fuelling system,

    P. T. Lang, C. Day, E. Fable, Y. Igit- khanov, F. Köchl, R. Mooney, B. Pegourie, B. Ploeckl, R. Wenninger, and H. Zohm, “Considerations on the DEMO pellet fuelling system,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 96-97, pp. 123–128, Oct. 2015. [On- line]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0920379615002434

    2015

  69. [69]

    Self-consistent investigation of density fueling needs on ITER and CFETR utilizing the new Pellet Ablation Module,

    J. McClenaghan, L. Lao, P. Parks, W. Wu, J. Zhang, and V. Chan, “Self-consistent investigation of density fueling needs on ITER and CFETR utilizing the new Pellet Ablation Module,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 63, no. 3, p. 036015, feb 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/acb1c6

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/acb1c6 2023

  70. [70]

    Physics of ultimate detachment of a tokamak divertor plasma,

    S. I. Krasheninnikov and A. S. Kukushkin, “Physics of ultimate detachment of a tokamak divertor plasma,”Journal of Plasma Physics, vol. 83, no. 5, p. 155830501, Oct. 2017. [Online]. Avail- able: https://www.cambridge.org/core/ journals/journal-of-plasma-physics/article/ physics-of-ultimate-detachment-of-a-tokamak-divertor-plasma/ B1A927D0F8DD3BB9C19A436C25C6FF31

    2017

  71. [71]

    Analytical calculations for impurity seeded partially detached di- vertor conditions,

    A. Kallenbach, M. Bernert, R. Dux, F. Reimold, M. Wischmeier, and AS- DEX Upgrade Team, “Analytical calculations for impurity seeded partially detached di- vertor conditions,”Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, vol. 58, no. 4, p. 045013, feb 2016. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1088/0741-3335/58/4/045013

    work page doi:10.1088/0741-3335/58/4/045013 2016

  72. [72]

    Divertor of the European DEMO: Engineering and technologies for power exhaust,

    J. You, G. Mazzone, E. Visca, H. Greu- ner, M. Fursdon, Y. Addab, C. Bachmann, T. Barrett, U. Bonavolontà, B. Böswirth, F. Castrovinci, C. Carelli, D. Coccorese, R. Coppola, F. Crescenzi, G. Di Gironimo, P. Di Maio, G. Di Mambro, F. Domptail, D. Dongiovanni, G. Dose, D. Flammini, L. Forest, P. Frosi, F. Gallay, B. Ghidersa, C. Harrington, K. Hunger, V. Im...

    2022

  73. [73]

    High gas throughput SOLPS-ITER simulations extending the ITER database to strong detachment,

    J. Lore, X. Bonnin, J.-S. Park, R. Pitts, and P. Stangeby, “High gas throughput SOLPS-ITER simulations extending the ITER database to strong detachment,” Nuclear Fusion, vol. 62, no. 10, p. 106017, 2022. [Online]. Available: https: //dx.doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/ac8a5f

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ac8a5f 2022

  74. [74]

    Impurity screening in Ohmic and high confinement (H-mode) plasmas in the Alcator C-Mod tokamak,

    G. M. McCracken, B. Lipschultz, B. LaBom- bard, J. A. Goetz, R. S. Granetz, D. Jablon- ski, S. Lisgo, H. Ohkawa, P. C. Stangeby, J. L. Terry, and Alcator Group, “Impurity screening in Ohmic and high confinement (H-mode) plasmas in the Alcator C-Mod tokamak,”Physics of Plasmas, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 1681–1689, 05 1997. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10....

    work page doi:10.1063/1.872365 1997

  75. [75]

    The effect of divertor baffling on Alcator C-Mod discharges,

    C. S. Pitcher, C. J. Boswell, J. A. Goetz, B. LaBombard, B. Lipschultz, J. E. Rice, and J. L. Terry, “The effect of divertor baffling on Alcator C-Mod discharges,”Physics of Plasmas, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 1894– 1903, 05 2000. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1063/1.874013

    work page doi:10.1063/1.874013 1903

  76. [76]

    Com- patibility of the radiating divertor with high performance plasmas in DIII-D,

    T. Petrie, M. Wade, N. Brooks, M. Fenster- macher, M. Groth, A. Hyatt, R. Isler, C. Las- nier, A. Leonard, M. Mahdavi, G. Porter, M. Schaffer, J. Watkins, and W. West, “Com- patibility of the radiating divertor with high performance plasmas in DIII-D,”Journal of Nuclear Materials, vol. 363-365, pp. 416–420, 2007, plasma-Surface Interactions-17. [On- line]...

    2007

  77. [77]

    Predictive modeling of the deu- terium gas puffing effect on impurity and heat flux compression for the HL-2M di- vertor by SOLPS,

    Y. Zhou, G. Zheng, H. Du, J. Li, and L. Xue, “Predictive modeling of the deu- terium gas puffing effect on impurity and heat flux compression for the HL-2M di- vertor by SOLPS,”Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 182, p. 113222, 2022. [On- line]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0920379622002186

    2022

  78. [78]

    SOLPS-ITER modeling of deu- terium throughput impact on the ITER SOL plasma,

    E. Kaveeva, S. Makarov, I. Senichenkov, V. Rozhansky, I. Veselova, X. Bonnin, and R. Pitts, “SOLPS-ITER modeling of deu- terium throughput impact on the ITER SOL plasma,”Nuclear Materials and En- ergy, vol. 35, p. 101424, 2023. [Online]. 50 Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S2352179123000637

    2023

  79. [79]

    Impact of gas injection location and divertor surface material on ITER fusion power op- eration phase divertor performance assessed with SOLPS-ITER*,

    J.-S. Park, X. Bonnin, R. Pitts, and J. Lore, “Impact of gas injection location and divertor surface material on ITER fusion power op- eration phase divertor performance assessed with SOLPS-ITER*,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 64, no. 3, p. 036002, jan 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/ad1d11

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ad1d11 2024

  80. [80]

    Assessment of the impact of fuelling puff location on diver- tor impurity compression and enrichment in STEP,

    R. Osawa, S. Newton, D. Moulton, S. Hende- rson, V. Badicelet al., “Assessment of the impact of fuelling puff location on diver- tor impurity compression and enrichment in STEP,”Nuclear Fusion, vol. 64, no. 10, p. 106007, 2024. [Online]. Available: https: //dx.doi.org/10.1088/1741-4326/ad677a

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ad677a 2024

Showing first 80 references.