Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The fixed boundary plasma equilibrium basis for a one Gigawatt electric stellarator power plant

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-13 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A fixed-boundary stellarator plasma shape is shown to meet the full set of design targets for a 1 GW-electric, 3 GW-fusion power plant.

desk verdict Solid plant-scale fixed-boundary optimization package; the evolved equilibrium's full alpha-power claim is still one step short of the evidence they already ran for the conceptual design. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.09346 v1 pith:BIOFANXY submitted 2026-07-10 physics.plasm-ph

Samuel A. Lazerson , António J. Coelho , Dana Douqa , Adrian Asmund Fessler , Luisa Hübner , Matteo Moscheni , Eoin Hodge , Richard Kembleton
show 4 more authors
Joona Sissonen Konsta Särkimäki Antti Snicker the Gauss Fusion Team
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.plasm-ph PACS 52.55.Hc52.55.Pi52.65.-y
keywords stellaratorfixed-boundaryequilibriumoptimizationfusionpowerplantbootstrapcurrentalphaconfinementneoclassicaltransportturbulent
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

This paper presents a fixed-boundary stellarator equilibrium intended as the plasma design basis for a one-gigawatt-electric fusion plant. Starting from a modified Wendelstein 7-X high-iota configuration, the authors reshape the plasma boundary until the configuration simultaneously confines fusion alphas well, keeps neoclassical ripple and bootstrap current low, stays MHD-stable, reduces turbulent heat fluxes, and can access a positive core radial electric field. Requirements were first quantified with simple profile-based power-balance modeling that fixes volume, field, and fusion power; those numbers then drive multi-objective optimization of the boundary. An intermediate conceptual design already improved many metrics but still carried too much bootstrap current and only marginal alpha confinement; the final evolved equilibrium is claimed to clear every listed target. If that claim holds under free-boundary coils and full transport, the work supplies a concrete, optimizable plasma shape on which a steady-state stellarator plant can be engineered.

What carries the argument

Multi-objective fixed-boundary optimization of the plasma shape (Garabedian boundary modes) inside a volume-renormalized VMEC equilibrium and a modified STELLOPT loop that targets ballooning, Γ_C fast-ion proxy, g_rr turbulence proxy, neoclassical ripple, bootstrap current (via BOOTSJ/DKES/PENTA), rotational transform, and core radial electric field while holding on-axis field fixed.

What would settle it

A full collisional slowing-down calculation of fusion-born alphas on the evolved free-boundary equilibrium that returns alpha power confinement below 85 percent, or a self-consistent free-boundary bootstrap current that exceeds 50 kA and destabilizes the n = 1 or n = 2 kink families.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The final evolved fixed-boundary equilibrium (GIGA v549) satisfies the full requirement set for a 1500 m^{3}, 6 T, four-period stellarator that produces 3 GW of fusion power: alpha power confinement above 85 percent, effective helical ripple below 0.01, net toroidal current below 50 kA, ballooning and kink stability for the n = 0, 1, 2 families, no large core-to-edge Alfvén gaps, reduced turbulent heat fluxes relative to W7-X, and a positive core radial electric field.

Load-bearing premise

That optimizing the fixed plasma boundary with proxy figures of merit and only limited a-posteriori checks is enough to guarantee reactor-level alpha confinement and transport once free-boundary coils and self-consistent profiles are included.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Coil sets can be designed to a single fixed plasma boundary that already meets the plant’s confinement, current, and stability targets.
  • An island divertor becomes feasible because the edge rotational transform sits just below the 4/4 resonance with low net current.
  • Core electron-root conditions become an explicit design target rather than an afterthought for impurity control.
  • 0.5-D power-balance limits (volume, field, density, temperature) can be treated as hard constraints while the shape is varied.
  • Further free-boundary and divertor work can proceed from a documented plasma that already clears the listed physics gates.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If free-boundary vertical-field response reopens bootstrap current, a second-stage coil-plus-plasma optimization will be required before the design is frozen.
  • The same volume-fixed, field-fixed optimization template could be reused for higher-field or lower-power variants once materials set wall-load limits.
  • Demonstrating the same proxy-to-performance chain on an existing device (shape-driven turbulence and alpha-proxy reduction) would raise confidence that the plant-scale targets are not only numerical.
  • Positive core Er at near-equal ion and electron temperatures, if realized, would couple impurity exhaust directly to the optimized magnetic spectrum.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a fixed-boundary stellarator equilibrium (GIGA v549), evolved from a modified high-iota W7-X configuration, as the plasma design basis for a 1 GWe (3 GW fusion) power plant. Requirements are quantified via 0.5D POPCON/ISS04 scoping (volume 1500 m³, B_axis ≈ 6 T, 4 field periods, island-divertor-compatible edge ι, etc.). STELLOPT/VMEC optimizations target ballooning stability, Γ_C, g_rr, ε_eff, bootstrap (BOOTSJ/DKES/PENTA), and core Er, with successive conceptual (v515) and evolved (v549) designs. A-posteriori checks cover Mercier/well, TERPSICHORE kink families, STELLGAP Alfvén gaps, NEO/PENTA/THRIFT neoclassical quantities, electrostatic stella turbulence, and (for v515) collisional BEAMS3D/ASCOT5 alpha slowing-down. Table 5 and §5 assert that v549 meets all design targets, including ≥85% alpha power confinement, net current <50 kA, and reduced turbulent heat fluxes.

Significance. A documented, multi-objective fixed-boundary equilibrium for a GW-class stellarator plant is of clear community and industrial value. The paper is explicit about requirements capture, code modifications (volume-renormalized VMEC; STELLOPT bootstrap, Er, and B_axis targets), and the progression from initial to conceptual to evolved designs. Proxy-based optimization plus external checks (TERPSICHORE, STELLGAP, stella, PENTA/THRIFT) is standard practice and usefully recorded. If the performance claims hold under free-boundary coils and full collisional alpha/transport modeling, this would be a substantive design-basis contribution for HELIAS-class reactors.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; Table 5; §5 (Fig. 11)] Abstract, Table 5, and §5 claim that the evolved equilibrium (v549)—the stated design basis—achieves alpha power confinement ≥85% (Table 5: “>520” MW of 600 MW). For the conceptual design (v515), that claim is supported by full collisional BEAMS3D/ASCOT5 slowing-down. For v549 the paper only shows collisionless losses of deeply trapped mid-radius markers (Fig. 11, losses <1%) and states that full slowing-down “has yet to be modeled.” Collisionless trapped confinement is necessary but not sufficient for integrated alpha power (passing orbits, pitch-angle scattering, finite-orbit and wall-load effects over a slowing-down time). Either provide collisional slowing-down for v549 comparable to v515, or revise the abstract/Table 5/§5 language so that “achieves all necessary requirements” does not assert a quantified power-confinement number that is not yet computed.
  2. [Tables 4–5; Fig. 13; §7] Net toroidal current <50 kA is a load-bearing target (Tables 4–5; THRIFT/PENTA results in Fig. 13). §7 correctly notes that fixed-boundary equilibria imply a vertical field balancing the hoop force and that free-boundary coil effects may change the bootstrap. Given that bootstrap minimization required iterative current–equilibrium feedback even in fixed boundary, the claim that v549 meets the <50 kA requirement for the plant should be stated as provisional pending free-boundary self-consistency, or a quantitative estimate of the expected free-boundary correction should be given.
  3. [Abstract; Table 5; §5 (Fig. 14)] Turbulence optimization is central to the requirements (Table 4; “reduced turbulent heat fluxes”; Fig. 14 stella results vs W7-X). The paper acknowledges that electrostatic, collisionless stella runs are insufficient and that electromagnetic treatment with collisions is needed. The claim of a turbulence-optimized reactor basis should be qualified accordingly in the abstract and Table 5 (e.g., “reduced electrostatic ion heat flux relative to W7-X under fixed gradients”), rather than left as an unqualified design-requirement fulfillment.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§1–§2] Systems-engineering sectioning (System Description / Design Basis / Concept Definition / Qualification Record / Plan) is clear but dense; a short traditional roadmap paragraph early in §1 would help non-systems readers navigate.
  2. [Table 2] Table 2 lists plasma volume as 1500 m^{-3}; units should be m^3 (consistent with the rest of the paper).
  3. [Figs. 7–9] Figure captions for boundary/Boozer plots (Figs. 7–9) are informative; ensure print-resolution of mid-radius |B| contours so field-line and symmetry features remain legible.
  4. [§5; Table 3] The 5% Te > Ti assumption used to access CERC while holding pressure fixed is stated in §5; flag it also in Table 3 or the requirements list so profile assumptions are collected in one place.
  5. [Front matter; References] Several references and the arXiv date line use 2026 placeholders; normalize bibliographic and front-matter dates before production.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: requirements from independent 0.5D scoping; optimization against external physics proxies; a-posteriori codes provide non-tautological checks.

  1. other [§3.1 Tools / §4.2 Development of the Evolved Plasma Configuration]
    "It was found necessary to include the predicted bootstrap from the previous optimization step in the next, in order to properly minimize the bootstrap current. ... after each optimization, the THRIFT code was used to compute the bootstrap current, which was then incorporated into the equilibrium computation of the next simulation."

    Bootstrap current is recomputed from the previous equilibrium and re-inserted as the current profile for the next VMEC solve. This is ordinary iterative self-consistency inside a fixed-boundary model, not a claim that an independent prediction equals its input by definition; free-boundary effects are explicitly flagged as remaining open (§7). Mild and non-load-bearing for the overall design claim.

full rationale

This is an engineering design/optimization paper, not a first-principles derivation of a new physical law. Requirements (volume 1500 m^{3}, 3 GW fusion, B_axis=6 T, ε_eff^{3/2}<0.01, bootstrap <50 kA, α confinement ≥85 %, ballooning/kink stability, etc.) are set by 0.5-D POPCON/ISS04 modeling with assumed profile shapes and literature scalings (Tables 2–4, §3.2); they are not derived from the optimized boundary. STELLOPT minimizes χ^{2} against independent proxies (COBRA ballooning, Γ_C, NEO ε_eff, g_rr/prox-1d, PENTA/BOOTSJ bootstrap, QI/QP metrics) whose definitions pre-exist the present equilibria. Volume is held fixed by a VMEC renormalization and B_axis by a vacuum pre-solve—standard constraints, not self-definition of the performance claims. Bootstrap is iterated for fixed-boundary self-consistency (previous-step current fed into next VMEC), which is ordinary fixed-point iteration, not a prediction forced by construction. A-posteriori verification uses external codes (TERPSICHORE, STELLGAP, stella, BEAMS3D/ASCOT, THRIFT) whose outputs are not algebraically identical to the optimization targets. The incomplete collisional α assessment for the final (v549) equilibrium is an evidence gap, not circularity. Self-citations (prior Lazerson/STELLOPT/BEAMS3D papers) supply tools, not load-bearing uniqueness theorems that force the result. Score 1 reflects only the mild, standard self-consistency loop for bootstrap; the central claim that the evolved equilibrium meets the design envelope remains independent of its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The design rests on standard stellarator MHD/neoclassical tooling and on plant-level choices (volume, B, power, profiles, ISS04) fixed by project requirements and 0.5D scoping rather than derived from first principles. No new physical entities are postulated; free parameters are engineering set-points and optimization weights.

free parameters (7)
  • Plasma volume
    Fixed at 1500 m³ by project requirement and VMEC boundary renormalization; sets fusion power scale with assumed profiles.
  • On-axis magnetic field
    Held at ≤6 T (target 6 T at φ=0) via PHIEDGE adjustment; chosen for ECRH/coil technology compatibility.
  • Temperature and density profile shapes
    Assumed forms (0.5D and optimization profiles, Fig. 4) with core Te~19.6 keV, ne0~1.7e20 m⁻³ etc.; not self-consistently evolved in the optimization loop.
  • ISS04 renormalization factor f_ren
    Nominal value 1.0 in 0.5D scoping; drives auxiliary-power and burn-window conclusions.
  • STELLOPT target weights (sigmas) and χ² composition
    Manually adjusted across successive GADE/LM runs; determine trade-offs among bootstrap, Γ_C, g_rr, ballooning, QI metrics.
  • Alpha power loss / confinement requirement
    ≥85% (510 MW of 600 MW) set as design target from plant heating needs; used as success criterion.
  • Balance-of-plant conversion efficiency ~33%
    Maps 1 GWe to 3 GW fusion; fixed project assumption.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Ideal nested-flux-surface MHD equilibria (VMEC) adequately represent the reactor plasma for optimization and stability metrics.
    Throughout §§2–5; islands/stochasticity deferred; paper discusses but does not resolve ideal vs MRxMHD validity.
  • domain assumption Proxy metrics (Γ_C for fast ions, g_rr/prox-1d for turbulence, ε_eff for 1/ν transport) correlate sufficiently with reactor-relevant confinement.
    §3.1 optimization functionals; a-posteriori codes only partially close the loop for the evolved equilibrium.
  • domain assumption ISS04 energy confinement scaling with assumed profiles predicts auxiliary power and burn accessibility.
    §3.2 0.5D POPCON analysis used to quantize requirements.
  • domain assumption Island divertor requires edge ι near a low-order rational just outside the boundary (ι_edge ≲ 1 for 4 periods).
    §2.1 and requirements list; divertor design deferred.
  • standard math Levenberg–Marquardt / GADE minimization of weighted χ² yields a physically meaningful multi-objective optimum.
    Standard nonlinear optimization practice as used in STELLOPT (§2.1, §4).
  • ad hoc to paper Slight Te > Ti (5%) is acceptable to access core electron root while holding pressure fixed.
    §5 radial electric field discussion for CERC targeting.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The fixed boundary plasma equilibrium basis for a one Gigawatt electric stellarator power plant." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BIOFANXY

@misc{pith2026260709346,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The fixed boundary plasma equilibrium basis for a one Gigawatt electric stellarator power plant},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BIOFANXY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.09346}
}
abstract

A fixed boundary stellarator equilibrium capable of producing 3 GW of fusion power (1 GW-electric) is presented as the design basis for the GIGA fusion power plant being developed by Gauss Fusion GmbH. The stellarator concept provides a steady-state, transient free, low recirculating power approach to a fusion power plant, which builds on 50 years of progress in plasma physics. A set of requirements for a fixed boundary equilibrium were determined through application of 0.5 D modeling. Optimization of a modified Wendelstein 7-X (W7-X) equilibrium was performed to achieve these requirements including alpha power confinement greater than $85\%$, neoclassical effective ripple below 0.01, bootstrap current below 50 kA, and reduced turbulent heat fluxes. In order to fix the plasma volume of $1500~m^3$ during optimization, the VMEC code was modified to renormalize the boundary coefficient to the desired plasma volume. The STELLOPT stellarator optimization code was modified as well to include new bootstrap current targets, a new target for the radial electric field, and the capability to hold the magnetic field on axis at a fixed value. An intermediary conceptual design plasma and final evolved fixed boundary equilibria are compared to the original modified W7-X equilibrium. The final evolved equilibrium is shown to achieve all the necessary requirements for the GIGA fusion power plant through more detailed modeling of stability, fast ion confinement, and transport.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.09346 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of neoclassical particle transport coefficients (D11) for a classical stellarator to an equivalent tokamak. The stellarator clearly shows higher transport coefficients indicating reduced confinement at low collisionality. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Fusion reaction rate cross sections for various fusion fuels (left) and radiative density limit (right) based on W7-X scalings for GIGA. The shaded region indicates the expected ion temperature regime of first generation toroidal fusion devices. codes like ASCOT [115], BEAMS3D [116], and SCENIC [117], with the first two allowing for particles to be traced to first walls of arbitrary complexity. Recent work to includ… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The systems breakdown architecture for the GIGA power plant showing how various systems are grouped. Turbulent transport is evaluated a posteriori for select equilibria using the stella code. This code provides radially local estimates of turbulent heat and particle fluxes under the assumption of an electrostatic, collisionless plasma with kinetic electron and ion species. Optimization was performed using the g rr m… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Temperature (purple) and density profile (green) shapes utilized in 0.5D modeling (solid) of the GIGA plasma and those used later for stellarator optimization (dashed). rotational transform at r/a = 2/3 (normalized minor radius). Additionally, the effect of impurities …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: POPCON plot for the nominal GIGA parameters as depicted in table 2. The color contours show alpha power. The white lines indicate the required auxiliary heating power. The red line indicates 3 GW total fusion power. Volume averages < ... > performed over profiles. 13 …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: POPCON plot scanning the sensitivity to input parameter variation. ISS04 scaling factor (upper left), alpha power confinement (upper right), ion temperature clamping (lower left), and Helium concentration (lower right) are depicted. the assumed parameters, in this stud…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Boundary shape (upper left), rotational transform (upper right), 3D B-field pattern (lower left), and B-field pattern at mid radius (lower right) for the initial equilibrium. Cross sections are shown at zero, quarter, and half field period. Red lines in rotational tran…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Boundary shape (upper left), rotational transform (upper right), 3D B-field pattern (lower left), and B-field pattern at mid radius (lower right) for the conceptual design equilibrium (GIGA v515). Cross sections shown at zero, quarter, and half field period. Red lines …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Boundary shape (upper left), rotational transform (upper right), 3D B-field pattern (lower left), and B-field pattern at mid radius (lower right) for the evolved equilibrium (GIGA v549). Cross sections shown at zero, quarter, and half field period. The conceptual desig…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Shape gradients for the evolved equilibrium (GIGA v549). The toroidal angle (ζ = Nfp ∗ ϕ) is defined over a field period. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Time evolution of collisionless deeply trapped alpha particle losses from mid-radius. Losses for the evolved configuration are below 1% [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The profile of neoclassical effective helical ripple showing that all three configurations have suppressed neoclassical transport. 23 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The boostrap current (right) and radial electric field (left) as computed by the coupled PENTA/DKES code. When possible the electron root is plotted in favor of the ion-root solution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Turbulent ion particle (left) and heat (right) flux as computed by STELLA for a fixed temperature gradient. The data for W7-X is taken from published results [144]. alphas). Thus, the assumption of Te > Ti in the core is a reasonable one to make [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figu…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: The Mercier criterion (left), Magnetic well/hill condition (center), and infinte-n ballooning stability (right) for the initial, conceptual, and evolved GIGA equilibria. Positive values indicate magnetic well and Mercier stability, while negative values imply ballooni…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Divertor topology and vacuum vessel design for stellarators

    physics.plasm-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Joint coil–vessel optimization with a stable fixed-point solver yields quasi-axisymmetric stellarators with controlled divertor topologies, including precise snowflake divertors.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

155 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Giga conceptual design report - executive summary

    Gauss Fusion GmbH. Giga conceptual design report - executive summary. Report, Gauss Fusion GmbH, 2025. https://gauss-fusion.com/cdr-executive-summary

    2025

  2. [2]

    The Stellarator Concept.Physics of Fluids, 1(4):253, 1958

    Lyman Spitzer. The Stellarator Concept.Physics of Fluids, 1(4):253, 1958

    1958

  3. [3]

    Allen H. Boozer. Stellarator design.Journal of Plasma Physics, 81(6):515810606, December 2015

    2015

  4. [4]

    A. J. H. Donn´ e, M. Cox, N. Sauthoff, and K. Schoenberg. Beyond power gain: Toward a comprehensive milestone framework for all fusion energy concepts.Physics of Plasmas, 32(9):090602, September 2025

    2025

  5. [5]

    Najmabadi, A

    F. Najmabadi, A. R. Raffray, S. I. Abdel-Khalik, L. Bromberg, L. Crosatti, L. El-Guebaly, P. R. Garabedian, A. A. Grossman, D. Henderson, A. Ibrahim, T. Ihli, T. B. Kaiser, B. Kiedrowski, L. P. Ku, J. F. Lyon, R. Maingi, S. Malang, C. Martin, T. K. Mau, B. Merrill, R. L. Moore, R. J. Peipert, D. A. Petti, D. L. Sadowski, M. Sawan, J. H. Schultz, R. Slayba...

    2008

  6. [6]

    Physics design for ARIES-CS.Fusion Science and Technology, 54:673–693, 2008

    L P Ku, P R Garabedian, J Lyon, A Turnbull, A Grossman, T K Mau, and M Zarnstorff. Physics design for ARIES-CS.Fusion Science and Technology, 54:673–693, 2008

    2008

  7. [7]

    R. Kemp, H. Lux, M. Kovari, J. Morris, R. Wenninger, H. Zohm, W. Biel, and G. Federici. Dealing with uncertainties in fusion power plant conceptual development.Nuclear Fusion, 57(4):046024, March 2017

    2017

  8. [8]

    Grieger, J

    G. Grieger, J. N¨ uhrenberg, H. Renner, J. Sapper, and H. Wobig. HELIAS stellarator reactor studies and related European technology studies.Fusion Engineering and Design, 25(1):73–84, August 1994

    1994

Show all 155 references
  1. [9]

    Warmer, S

    F. Warmer, S. B. Torrisi, C. D. Beidler, A. Dinklage, Y. Feng, J. Geiger, F. Schauer, Y. Turkin, R. Wolf, P. Xanthopoulos, R. Kemp, P. Knight, H. Lux, and D. Ward. System Code Analysis of HELIAS-Type Fusion Reactor and Economic Comparison With Tokamaks. IEEE Transactions on Pl...

    2016

  2. [10]

    Maris, Allen Wang, Cristina Rea, Robert Granetz, and Earl Marmar

    Andrew D. Maris, Allen Wang, Cristina Rea, Robert Granetz, and Earl Marmar. The Impact of Disruptions on the Economics of a Tokamak Power Plant.Fusion Science and Technology, 80(5):636–652, July 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    Yu Gao, Joachim Geiger, Marcin W. Jakubowski, Peter Drewelow, Michael Endler, Kian Rahbarnia, Sergey Bozhenkov, Matthias Otte, Yasuhiro Suzuki, Yuhe Feng, Holger Niemann, Fabio Pisano, Adnan Ali, Aleix Puig Sitjes, Marco Zanini, Heinrich Laqua, Torsten Stange, Stefan Marsen, T...

    2019

  4. [12]

    Geiger, C.D

    J. Geiger, C.D. Beidler, M. Drevlak, H. Maaßberg, C. N¨ uhrenberg, Y. Suzuki, and Yu. Turkin. Effects of Net Currents on the Magnetic Configuration of W7-X.Contributions to Plasma Physics, 50(8):770–774, July 2010. 28 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S...

    2010

  5. [13]

    Neuner, K

    U. Neuner, K. Rahbarnia, C. D. Beidler, A. Dinklage, Y. Turkin, T. Stange, T. Andreeva, J. Schilling, H. Thomsen, M. Beurskens, S. Bozhenkov, K. J. Brunner, H. Damm, G. Fuchert, J. Geiger, U. Hergenhahn, U. H¨ ofel, J. Knauer, M. Krychowiak, S. Kwak, A. Langenberg, N. Pablant,...

    2021

  6. [14]

    Sunn Pedersen, M

    T. Sunn Pedersen, M. Otte, S. Lazerson, P. Helander, S. Bozhenkov, C. Biedermann, T. Klinger, R. C. Wolf, H. S. Bosch, and The Wendelstein 7-X Team. Confirmation of the topology of the Wendelstein 7-X magnetic field to better than 1:100,000.Nature Communications, 7(1):13493, D...

    2016

  7. [15]

    Erckmann, U

    V. Erckmann, U. Gasparino, and H. MaaBberg. Current drive and bootstrap current in stellarators.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 34(13):1917, December 1992

    1917

  8. [16]

    D. T. Anderson, A. Abdou, A. F. Almagri, F. S. B. Anderson, J. M. Canik, W. Guttenfelder, C. Lechte, K. M. Likin, H. Lu, S. Oh, P. H. Probert, J. Radder, V. Sakaguchi, J. Schmitt, J. N. Talmadge, K. Zhai, D. L. Brower, and C. Deng. Overview of Recent Results from HSX. Fusion S...

    2006

  9. [17]

    J. N. Talmadge, F. S. B. Anderson, D. T. Anderson, C. Deng, W. Guttenfelder, K. M. Likin, J. Lore, J. C. Schmitt, and K. Zhai. Experimental Tests of Quasisymmetry in HSX.Plasma and Fusion Research, 3:S1002–S1002, 2008

    2008

  10. [18]

    R.C. Wolf, A. Ali, A. Alonso, J. Baldzuhn, C. Beidler, M. Beurskens, C. Biedermann, H.-S. Bosch, S. Bozhenkov, R. Brakel, A. Dinklage, Y. Feng, G. Fuchert, J. Geiger, O. Grulke, P. Helander, M. Hirsch, U. H¨ ofel, M. Jakubowski, J. Knauer, G. Kocsis, R. K¨ onig, P. Kornejew, A...

    2026

  11. [19]

    Klinger, T

    T. Klinger, T. Andreeva, S. Bozhenkov, C. Brandt, R. Burhenn, B. Buttensch¨ on, G. Fuchert, B. Geiger, O. Grulke, H.P. Laqua, N. Pablant, K. Rahbarnia, T. Stange, A. von Stechow, N. Tamura, H. Thomsen, Y. Turkin, T. Wegner, I. Abramovic, S. ¨Ak¨ aslompolo, J. Alcuson, P. Aleyn...

    2026

  12. [20]

    Grulke, G

    O. Grulke, G. Acton, J. Adamek, D. Aggelis, R.-M. Alamo-Calderon, C. Albert, P. Aleynikov, K. Aleynikova, A. Alonso, G.C. Amanekwe, G. Anda, T. Andreeva, E. Andrew, A. Arkuszewski, S. Arnold, M. Arranz, M. Arvanitou, E. Ascasibar, M. Astrain Etxezarreta, O. Asztalos, K. Avrami...

    2026

  13. [21]

    J Cheng, Y Xu, H F Liu, X Q Wang, W M Xuan, J Huang, H Liu, X Zhang, J F Shen, J Hu, H Lan, Y C Li, W Li, H Zhou, J R Shao, A Shimizu, M Isobe, S Okamura, M Shoji, K Ogawa, D Yin, C Tang, and the CFQS team. Construction progress of the Chinese First Quasi-axisymmetric Stellara...

    2025

  14. [22]

    Single-stage gradient-based stellarator coil design: stochastic optimization.Nuclear Fusion, 62(7):076034, May 2022

    Florian Wechsung, Andrew Giuliani, Matt Landreman, Antoine Cerfon, and Georg Stadler. Single-stage gradient-based stellarator coil design: stochastic optimization.Nuclear Fusion, 62(7):076034, May 2022. 32 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. Lazersonet al

    2022

  15. [23]

    Single-stage gradient-based stellarator coil design: Optimization for near-axis quasi-symmetry.Journal of Computational Physics, 459:111147, June 2022

    Andrew Giuliani, Florian Wechsung, Antoine Cerfon, Georg Stadler, and Matt Landreman. Single-stage gradient-based stellarator coil design: Optimization for near-axis quasi-symmetry.Journal of Computational Physics, 459:111147, June 2022

    2022

  16. [24]

    Jorge, A

    R. Jorge, A. Goodman, M. Landreman, J. Rodrigues, and F. Wechsung. Single-stage stellarator optimization: combining coils with fixed boundary equilibria.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 65(7):074003, June 2023

    2023

  17. [25]

    C. B. Smiet, J. Loizu, E. Balkovic, and A. Baillod. Efficient single-stage optimization of islands in finite-βstellarator equilibria.Physics of Plasmas, 32(1):012504, January 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    Kovrizhnykh and S.V

    L.M. Kovrizhnykh and S.V. Shchepetov. MHD equilibrium and stability of a stellarator plasma.Nuclear Fusion, 23(7):859, July 1983

    1983

  19. [27]

    V. D. Shafranov. Magnetohydrodynamic theory of plasma equilibrium and stability in stellarators: Survey of results.The Physics of Fluids, 26(2):357–364, February 1983

    1983

  20. [28]

    Bauer, O

    F. Bauer, O. Betancourt, and P. Garabedian. Nonlinear magnetohydrodynamic stability.The Physics of Fluids, 24(1):48–54, January 1981

    1981

  21. [29]

    Ho and Russell M

    Darwin D.-M. Ho and Russell M. Kulsrud. Neoclassical transport in stellarators.The Physics of Fluids, 30(2):442–461, February 1987

    1987

  22. [30]

    Maassberg, W

    H. Maassberg, W. Lotz, and J. N¨ uhrenberg. Neoclassical bootstrap current and transport in optimized stellarator configurations.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 5(10):3728–3736, October 1993

    1993

  23. [31]

    Collisional transport in plasma

    Fred Hinton. Collisional transport in plasma. InHandbook of Plasma Physics, volume 1, page

  24. [32]

    North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983

    1983

  25. [33]

    K. C. Shaing, E. C. Crume, J. S. Tolliver, S. P. Hirshman, and W. I. van Rij. Bootstrap current and parallel viscosity in the low collisionality regime in toroidal plasmas.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 1(1):148–152, January 1989

    1989

  26. [34]

    C. T. Hsu, K. C. Shaing, R. P. Gormley, and D. J. Sigmar. Bootstrap current induced by fusion born alpha particles.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 4(12):4023–4032, December 1992

    1992

  27. [35]

    A. S. Ware, D. A. Spong, L. A. Berry, S. P. Hirshman, and J. F. Lyon. Bootstrap Current in Quasi-Symmetric Stellarators.Fusion Science and Technology, 50(2):236–244, August 2006. eprint: https://doi.org/10.13182/FST06-A1241

    2006 doi

  28. [36]

    Helander and J

    P. Helander and J. N¨ uhrenberg. Bootstrap current and neoclassical transport in quasi-isodynamic stellarators.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 51(5):055004, February 2009

    2009

  29. [37]

    Effects of the radial electric field in a quasisymmetric stellarator.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 53(1):015004, January 2011

    Matt Landreman and Peter J Catto. Effects of the radial electric field in a quasisymmetric stellarator.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 53(1):015004, January 2011

    2011

  30. [38]

    Neoclassical flow, current, and electric field in a quasi-isodynamic stellarator.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 53(3):035016, March 2011

    Matt Landreman and Peter J Catto. Neoclassical flow, current, and electric field in a quasi-isodynamic stellarator.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 53(3):035016, March 2011

    2011

  31. [39]

    B. F. Lee, S. A. Lazerson, H. M. Smith, C. D. Beidler, and N. A. Pablant. Direct optimization of neoclassical ion transport in stellarator reactors.Nuclear Fusion, 64(10):106054, September 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    Beidler, M

    C.D. Beidler, M. Drevlak, J. Geiger, P. Helander, H.M. Smith, and Y. Turkin. Reduction of neoclassical bulk-ion transport to avoid helium-ash retention in stellarator reactors.Nuclear Fusion, 64(12):126030, December 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    W. Horton. Drift waves and transport.Reviews of Modern Physics, 71(3):735–778, April 1999. 33 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. Lazersonet al

    1999

  34. [42]

    A. M. Dimits, G. Bateman, M. A. Beer, B. I. Cohen, W. Dorland, G. W. Hammett, C. Kim, J. E. Kinsey, M. Kotschenreuther, A. H. Kritz, L. L. Lao, J. Mandrekas, W. M. Nevins, S. E. Parker, A. J. Redd, D. E. Shumaker, R. Sydora, and J. Weiland. Comparisons and physics basis of tok...

    2000

  35. [43]

    A. J. Brizard and T. S. Hahm. Foundations of nonlinear gyrokinetic theory.Reviews of Modern Physics, 79(2):421–468, April 2007

    2007

  36. [44]

    Dominguez, B

    N. Dominguez, B. A. Carreras, V. E. Lynch, and P. H. Diamond. Dissipative trapped electron modes inl= 2 torsatrons.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 4(9):2894–2906, September 1992

    1992

  37. [45]

    Optimization, mhd mode and alpha particle confinement behaviour of helias equilibria.Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Research, 2:603, 1990

    W Lotz, J N¨ uhrenberg, and C Schwab. Optimization, mhd mode and alpha particle confinement behaviour of helias equilibria.Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Research, 2:603, 1990

    1990

  38. [46]

    Simulating fusion alpha heating in a stellarator reactor.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 63(12):125033, December 2021

    Samuel A Lazerson, Alexandra LeViness, and Jorrit Lion. Simulating fusion alpha heating in a stellarator reactor.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 63(12):125033, December 2021

    2021

  39. [47]

    Bader, D.T

    A. Bader, D.T. Anderson, M. Drevlak, B.J. Faber, C.C. Hegna, S. Henneberg, M. Landreman, J.C. Schmitt, Y. Suzuki, and A. Ware. Modeling of energetic particle transport in optimized stellarators.Nuclear Fusion, 61(11):116060, October 2021

    2021

  40. [48]

    Protecting ITER walls: fast ion power loads in 3D magnetic field.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 59(1):014013, October 2016

    T Kurki-Suonio, K S¨ arkim¨ aki, S¨Ak¨ aslompolo, J Varje, Y Liu, S Sipil¨ a, O Asunta, E Hirvijoki, A Snicker, J Ter¨ av¨ a, M Cavinato, M Gagliardi, V Parail, and G Saibene. Protecting ITER walls: fast ion power loads in 3D magnetic field.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion...

    2016

  41. [49]

    Mark J. H. Cornelissen, Samuel A. Lazerson, Yu Gao, Josefine H. E. Proll, Paul McNeely, Norbert Rust, Dirk Hartmann, Marcin W. Jakubowski, Adnan Ali, Fabio Pisano, Holger Niemann, Aleix Puig Sitjes, Ralf K¨ onig, Robert C. Wolf, and the W7-X. Team. Identification of fast ion w...

    2022

  42. [50]

    Placement of a fast ion loss detector array for neutral beam injected particles in Wendelstein 7-X.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 64(3):035006, March 2022

    D Kulla, S Lazerson, S G¨ unter, M Hirsch, D Hartmann, P McNeely, N Rust, and R C Wolf. Placement of a fast ion loss detector array for neutral beam injected particles in Wendelstein 7-X.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 64(3):035006, March 2022

    2022

  43. [51]

    S. P. Hirshman and J.C. Whitson. Steepest-descent moment method for three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic equilibria.Physics of Fluids, 26(12):3553, 1983

    1983

  44. [52]

    D. W. Dudt and E. Kolemen. DESC: A stellarator equilibrium solver.Physics of Plasmas, 27(10):102513, October 2020

    2020

  45. [53]

    GVEC: A flexible 3D MHD equilibrium solver.Journal of Open Source Software, 11(120):9670, April 2026

    Florian Hindenlang, Omar Maj, Robert Babin, Robert K¨ oberl, Dean Muir, Tiago Tamissa Ribeiro, Markus Rampp, and Eric Sonnendr¨ ucker. GVEC: A flexible 3D MHD equilibrium solver.Journal of Open Source Software, 11(120):9670, April 2026

    2026

  46. [54]

    A High Performance Spectral Code for Nonlinear MHD Stability.Journal of Computational Physics, 110(2):407–418, February 1994

    Mark Taylor. A High Performance Spectral Code for Nonlinear MHD Stability.Journal of Computational Physics, 110(2):407–418, February 1994

    1994

  47. [55]

    S. P. Hirshman, R. Sanchez, and C. R. Cook. SIESTA: A scalable iterative equilibrium solver for toroidal applications.Physics of Plasmas, 18(6):062504, June 2011

    2011

  48. [56]

    Development and application of HINT2 to helical system plasmas.Nuclear Fusion, 46(11):L19–L24, November 2006

    Yasuhiro Suzuki, Noriyoshi Nakajima, Kiyomasa Watanabe, Yuji Nakamura, and Takaya Hayashi. Development and application of HINT2 to helical system plasmas.Nuclear Fusion, 46(11):L19–L24, November 2006

    2006

  49. [57]

    Ferraro, S.C

    Yao Zhou, N.M. Ferraro, S.C. Jardin, and H.R. Strauss. Approach to nonlinear magnetohydrodynamic simulations in stellarator geometry.Nuclear Fusion, 61(8):086015, July 2021

    2021

  50. [58]

    M. J. Hole, S. R. Hudson, and R. L. Dewar. Stepped pressure profile equilibria in cylindrical plasmas via partial Taylor relaxation.Journal of Plasma Physics, 72(6):1167–1171, December 2006. 34 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. Lazersonet al

    2006

  51. [59]

    S. R. Hudson, R. L. Dewar, G. Dennis, M. J. Hole, M. McGann, G. von Nessi, and S. Lazerson. Computation of multi-region relaxed magnetohydrodynamic equilibria.Physics of Plasmas, 19(11):112502, November 2012

    2012

  52. [60]

    Loizu, S

    J. Loizu, S. Hudson, A. Bhattacharjee, and P. Helander. Magnetic islands and singular currents at rational surfaces in three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic equilibria.Physics of Plasmas, 22(2):022501, February 2015

    2015

  53. [61]

    Loizu, S

    J. Loizu, S. R. Hudson, A. Bhattacharjee, S. Lazerson, and P. Helander. Existence of three-dimensional ideal-magnetohydrodynamic equilibria with current sheets.Physics of Plasmas, 22(9):090704, September 2015

    2015

  54. [62]

    Loizu, S

    J. Loizu, S. R. Hudson, and C. N¨ uhrenberg. Verification of the SPEC code in stellarator geometries.Physics of Plasmas, 23(11):112505, November 2016

    2016

  55. [63]

    Ramasamy, G

    R. Ramasamy, G. Bustos Ramirez, M. Hoelzl, J. Graves, G. Su´ arez L´ opez, K. Lackner, S. G¨ unter, and JOREK team. Modeling of saturated external MHD instabilities in tokamaks: A comparison of 3D free boundary equilibria and nonlinear stability calculations.Physics of Plasmas...

    2022

  56. [64]

    Ramasamy, M

    R. Ramasamy, M. Hoelzl, S. Henneberg, E. Strumberger, K. Lackner, and S. G¨ unter. How well can VMEC predict the initial saturation of external kink modes in near circular tokamaks and l=2 stellarators?Physics of Plasmas, 30(6):062506, June 2023

    2023

  57. [65]

    Kinetic shielding of magnetic islands in 3D equilibria.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 53(2):024003, February 2011

    C C Hegna. Kinetic shielding of magnetic islands in 3D equilibria.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 53(2):024003, February 2011

    2011

  58. [66]

    C.C. Hegna. Healing of magnetic islands in stellarators by plasma flow.Nuclear Fusion, 51(11):113017, November 2011

    2011

  59. [67]

    C. C. Hegna. Plasma flow healing of magnetic islands in stellaratorsa).Physics of Plasmas, 19(5):056101, March 2012

    2012

  60. [68]

    Narushima, S

    Y. Narushima, S. Sakakibara, Y. Suzuki, K.Y. Watanabe, S. Ohdachi, Y. Takemura, M. Yoshinuma, K. Ida, F. Castej´ on, D. L´ opez-Bruna, C.C. Hegna, M. Kobayashi, H. Tanaka, T. Akiyama, N. Ohno, and The LHD Experiment Group. Observations of sustained phase shifted magnetic islan...

    2017

  61. [69]

    Lazerson, Joaquim Loizu, Steven Hirshman, and Stuart R

    Samuel A. Lazerson, Joaquim Loizu, Steven Hirshman, and Stuart R. Hudson. Verification of the ideal magnetohydrodynamic response at rational surfaces in the VMEC code.Physics of Plasmas, 23(1):012507, January 2016

    2016

  62. [70]

    J. D. King, E. J. Strait, S. A. Lazerson, N. M. Ferraro, N. C. Logan, S. R. Haskey, J.-K. Park, J. M. Hanson, M. J. Lanctot, Yueqiang Liu, R. Nazikian, M. Okabayashi, C. Paz-Soldan, D. Shiraki, and A. D. Turnbull. Experimental tests of linear and nonlinear three-dimensional eq...

    2015

  63. [71]

    Equilibrium and stability of a toroidal magnetohydrodynamic system in the neighbourhood of a magnetic axis.Nuclear Fusion, 4(3):213, September 1964

    Claude Mercier. Equilibrium and stability of a toroidal magnetohydrodynamic system in the neighbourhood of a magnetic axis.Nuclear Fusion, 4(3):213, September 1964

    1964

  64. [72]

    A brief review of magnetic wells

    J M Greene. A brief review of magnetic wells. Technical Report GA-A22135, General Atomics, April 1998

    1998

  65. [73]

    Magnetic well and Mercier stability of stellarators near the magnetic axis.Journal of Plasma Physics, 86(5):905860510, October 2020

    Matt Landreman and Rogerio Jorge. Magnetic well and Mercier stability of stellarators near the magnetic axis.Journal of Plasma Physics, 86(5):905860510, October 2020

    2020

  66. [74]

    Tang, J.W

    W.M. Tang, J.W. Connor, and R.J. Hastie. Kinetic-ballooning-mode theory in general geometry.Nuclear Fusion, 20(11):1439, November 1980

    1980

  67. [75]

    W. A. Cooper, D. B. Singleton, and R. L. Dewar. Spectrum of ballooning instabilities in a stellarator.Physics of Plasmas, 3(1):275–280, January 1996

    1996

  68. [76]

    M. D. Kruskal and R. M. Kulsrud. Equilibrium of a Magnetically Confined Plasma in a Toroid.The Physics of Fluids, 1(4):265–274, July 1958. 35 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. Lazersonet al

    1958

  69. [77]

    C. Z. Cheng and M. S. Chance. Low-n shear Alfv´ en spectra in axisymmetric toroidal plasmas.The Physics of Fluids, 29(11):3695–3701, November 1986

    1986

  70. [78]

    G. Y. Fu and J. W. Van Dam. Excitation of the toroidicity-induced shear Alfv´ en eigenmode by fusion alpha particles in an ignited tokamak.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 1(10):1949–1952, October 1989

    1949

  71. [79]

    Ohdachi, K.Y

    S. Ohdachi, K.Y. Watanabe, K. Tanaka, Y. Suzuki, Y. Takemura, S. Sakakibara, X.D. Du, T. Bando, Y. Narushima, R. Sakamoto, J. Miyazawa, G. Motojima, T. Morisaki, and LHD Experiment Group. Observation of the ballooning mode that limits the operation space of the high-density su...

    2017

  72. [80]

    Sanchez, S.P

    R. Sanchez, S.P. Hirshman, J.C. Whitson, and A.S. Ware. COBRA: An Optimized Code for Fast Analysis of Ideal Ballooning Stability of Three-Dimensional Magnetic Equilibria. Journal of Computational Physics, 161(2):576–588, July 2000

    2000

  73. [81]

    C. J. Ham, I. T. Chapman, A. Kirk, and S. Saarelma. Modelling of three dimensional equilibrium and stability of MAST plasmas with magnetic perturbations using VMEC and COBRA.Physics of Plasmas, 21(10):102501, October 2014

    2014

  74. [82]

    Dynamics of ideal modes and subsequent ELM crashes in 3D tokamak geometry from external magnetic perturbations.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 61(1):014019, January 2019

    M Willensdorfer, T B Cote, M Griener, D A Ryan, E Strumberger, W Suttrop, N Wang, M Cavedon, S S Denk, M Dunne, R Fischer, J Galdon-Quiroga, C J Ham, C C Hegna, M Hoelzl, A Kirk, M Maraschek, F Mink, N Leuthold, F Orain, E P Seliunin, H Zohm, the ASDEX Upgrade Team, and the MS...

    2019

  75. [83]

    Anderson, W

    David V. Anderson, W. Anthony Cooper, Ralf Gruber, Silvio Merazzi, and Ulrich Schwenn. TERPSICHORE: A Three-Dimensional Ideal Magnetohydrodynamic Stability Program. In Jozef T. Devreese and Piet E. Van Camp, editors,Scientific Computing on Supercomputers II, pages 159–174. Spr...

    1990

  76. [84]

    Ideal magnetohydrodynamics: Global mode analysis of three-dimensional plasma configurations.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 5(9):3195–3206, September 1993

    Carolin Schwab. Ideal magnetohydrodynamics: Global mode analysis of three-dimensional plasma configurations.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 5(9):3195–3206, September 1993

    1993

  77. [85]

    Alfv´ enic fluctuations measured by in-vessel Mirnov coils at the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator

    K Rahbarnia, H Thomsen, J Schilling, S vaz Mendes, M Endler, R Kleiber, A K¨ onies, M Borchardt, C Slaby, T Bluhm, M Zilker, B B Carvalho, and Wendelstein 7-X Team. Alfv´ enic fluctuations measured by in-vessel Mirnov coils at the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator. Plasma Physics an...

    2021

  78. [86]

    Vaz Mendes, K

    S. Vaz Mendes, K. Rahbarnia, C. Slaby, H. Thomsen, J. Schilling, M. Borchardt, R. Kleiber, A. K¨ onies, J.-P. B¨ ahner, A. von Stechow, T. Sunn Pedersen, T. Klinger, and the W7-X. Team. Broadband Alfv´ enic excitation correlated to turbulence level in the Wendelstein 7-X stell...

    2023

  79. [87]

    AE3D, January 2016

    Donald Spong. AE3D, January 2016

    2016

  80. [88]

    Slaby, A

    C. Slaby, A. K¨ onies, and R. Kleiber. A perturbative multi-mode model with finite parallel electric field for fast-ion-driven Alfv´ en eigenmodes.Nuclear Fusion, 64(12):126016, October 2024

    2024

  81. [89]

    D. A. Spong, R. Sanchez, and A. Weller. Shear Alfv´ en continua in stellarators.Physics of Plasmas, 10(8):3217–3224, August 2003

    2003

  82. [90]

    Transport phenomena in a collisionless plasma in a toroidal magnetic system.Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, 26(1):233–240, January 1968

    A A Galeev and R Z Sagdeev. Transport phenomena in a collisionless plasma in a toroidal magnetic system.Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, 26(1):233–240, January 1968

    1968

  83. [91]

    A. A. Galeev, R. Z. Sagdeev, H. P. Furth, and M. N. Rosenbluth. Plasma Diffusion in a Toroidal Stellarator.Physical Review Letters, 22(11):511–514, March 1969

    1969

  84. [92]

    Garabedian

    Paul R. Garabedian. Quasi-axially symmetric stellarators.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95(17):9732–9737, August 1998. 36 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. Lazersonet al

    1998

  85. [93]

    Quasi-helical symmetry in stellarators.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 37(11A):A103–A117, November 1995

    A H Boozer. Quasi-helical symmetry in stellarators.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 37(11A):A103–A117, November 1995

    1995

  86. [94]

    Physics issues of compact drift optimized stellarators.Nuclear Fusion, 41(6):711–716, June 2001

    D.A Spong, S.P Hirshman, L.A Berry, J.F Lyon, R.H Fowler, D.J Strickler, M.J Cole, B.N Nelson, D.E Williamson, A.S Ware, D Alban, R S´ anchez, G.Y Fu, D.A Monticello, W.H Miner, and P.M Valanju. Physics issues of compact drift optimized stellarators.Nuclear Fusion, 41(6):711–7...

    2001

  87. [95]

    Evaluation of 1/νneoclassical transport in stellarators.Phys

    V V Nemov, S V Kasilov, W Kernbichler, and M F Heyn. Evaluation of 1/νneoclassical transport in stellarators.Phys. Plasmas, 6(12):11, 1999

    1999

  88. [96]

    W. I. van Rij and S. P. Hirshman. Variational bounds for transport coefficients in three-dimensional toroidal plasmas.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 1(3):563–569, March 1989

    1989

  89. [97]

    Goodman, Pavlos Xanthopoulos, Gabriel G

    Alan G. Goodman, Pavlos Xanthopoulos, Gabriel G. Plunk, H˚ akan Smith, Carolin N¨ uhrenberg, Craig D. Beidler, Sophia A. Henneberg, Gareth Roberg-Clark, Michael Drevlak, and Per Helander. Quasi-Isodynamic Stellarators with Low Turbulence as Fusion Reactor Candidates.PRX Energy...

    2024

  90. [98]

    R. J. Bickerton, J. W. Connor, and J. B. Taylor. Diffusion Driven Plasma Currents and Bootstrap Tokamak.Nature Physical Science, 229(4):110–112, January 1971

    1971

  91. [99]

    D. A. Spong. Generation and damping of neoclassical plasma flows in stellarators.Physics of Plasmas, 12(5):056114, April 2005

    2005

  92. [100]

    Landreman, H

    M. Landreman, H. M. Smith, A. Moll´ en, and P. Helander. Comparison of particle trajectories and collision operators for collisional transport in nonaxisymmetric plasmas.Physics of Plasmas, 21(4):042503, April 2014

    2014

  93. [101]

    van Ham, S.A

    L. van Ham, S.A. Lazerson, J.C. Schmitt, B.F. Lee, M. Beurskens, K.J. Brunner, N. Chaudhary, G. Fuchert, J. Geiger, M. Hirsch, J. Knauer, A. Langenberg, J.W. Oosterbeek, N. Pablant, E. Pasch, K. Rahbarnia, G. Weir, and the W7-X. Team. Modeling resistive-inductive evolution of ...

    2025

  94. [102]

    Paulett C. Liewer. Measurements of microturbulence in tokamaks and comparisons with theories of turbulence and anomalous transport.Nuclear Fusion, 25(5):543, May 1985

    1985

  95. [103]

    A. J. Wootton, B. A. Carreras, H. Matsumoto, K. McGuire, W. A. Peebles, Ch. P. Ritz, P. W. Terry, and S. J. Zweben. Fluctuations and anomalous transport in tokamaks.Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, 2(12):2879–2903, December 1990

    1990

  96. [104]

    M. N. A. Beurskens, S. A. Bozhenkov, O. Ford, P. Xanthopoulos, A. Zocco, Y. Turkin, A. Alonso, C. Beidler, I. Calvo, D. Carralero, T. Estrada, G. Fuchert, O. Grulke, M. Hirsch, K. Ida, M. Jakubowski, C. Killer, M. Krychowiak, S. Kwak, S. Lazerson, A. Langenberg, R. Lunsford, N...

    2021

  97. [105]

    D Carralero, T Estrada, E Maragkoudakis, T Windisch, J A Alonso, J L Velasco, O Ford, M Jakubowski, S Lazerson, M Beurskens, S Bozhenkov, I Calvo, H Damm, G Fuchert, J M Garc´ ıa-Rega˜ na, U H¨ ofel, N Marushchenko, N Pablant, E S´ anchez, H M Smith, E Pasch, T Stange, and the...

    2022

  98. [106]

    Electron temperature gradient driven turbulence.Phys

    F Jenko, W Dorland, M Kotschenreuther, and B N Rogers. Electron temperature gradient driven turbulence.Phys. Plasmas, 7(5):8, 2000

    2000

  99. [107]

    Barnes, F

    M. Barnes, F. I. Parra, and M. Landreman. stella: An operator-split, implicit–explicit δf-gyrokinetic code for general magnetic field configurations.Journal of Computational Physics, 391:365–380, August 2019. 37 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. L...

    2019

  100. [108]

    H. E. Mynick, N. Pomphrey, and P. Xanthopoulos. Optimizing Stellarators for Turbulent Transport.Physical Review Letters, 105(9):095004, August 2010

    2010

  101. [109]

    Xanthopoulos, H

    P. Xanthopoulos, H. E. Mynick, P. Helander, Y. Turkin, G. G. Plunk, F. Jenko, T. G¨ orler, D. Told, T. Bird, and J. H. E. Proll. Controlling Turbulence in Present and Future Stellarators.Physical Review Letters, 113(15):155001, October 2014

    2014

  102. [110]

    TEM turbulence optimisation in stellarators.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 58(1):014006, January 2016

    J H E Proll, H E Mynick, P Xanthopoulos, S A Lazerson, and B J Faber. TEM turbulence optimisation in stellarators.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 58(1):014006, January 2016

    2016

  103. [111]

    Lazerson, Pavlos Xanthopoulos, Harry Mynick, and David Gates

    Samuel A. Lazerson, Pavlos Xanthopoulos, Harry Mynick, and David Gates. Ion temperature gradient turbulence modification in quasi-axisymmetry.Physics of Plasmas, 26(2):022509, February 2019

    2019

  104. [112]

    S. A. Bozhenkov, Y. Kazakov, O. P. Ford, M. N. A. Beurskens, J. Alcus´ on, J. A. Alonso, J. Baldzuhn, C. Brandt, K. J. Brunner, H. Damm, G. Fuchert, J. Geiger, O. Grulke, M. Hirsch, U. H¨ ofel, Z. Huang, J. Knauer, M. Krychowiak, A. Langenberg, H. P. Laqua, S. Lazerson, N. B. ...

    2020

  105. [113]

    V. V. Nemov, S. V. Kasilov, W. Kernbichler, and G. O. Leitold. Poloidal motion of trapped particle orbits in real-space coordinates.Physics of Plasmas, 15(5):052501, May 2008

    2008

  106. [114]

    Velasco, I

    J.L. Velasco, I. Calvo, S. Mulas, E. S´ anchez, F.I. Parra, ´A. Cappa, and the W7-X Team. A model for the fast evaluation of prompt losses of energetic ions in stellarators.Nuclear Fusion, 61(11):116059, November 2021

    2021

  107. [115]

    Schmitt, Samuel A

    Alexandra LeViness, John C. Schmitt, Samuel A. Lazerson, Aaron Bader, Benjamin J. Faber, Kenneth C. Hammond, and David A. Gates. Energetic particle optimization of quasi-axisymmetric stellarator equilibria.Nuclear Fusion, 63(1):016018, December 2022

    2022

  108. [116]

    High-performance orbit-following code ASCOT5 for Monte Carlo simulations in fusion plasmas, August 2019

    Jari Varje, Konsta S¨ arkim¨ aki, Joona Kontula, Patrik Ollus, Taina Kurki-Suonio, Antti Snicker, Eero Hirvijoki, and Simppa ¨Ak¨ aslompolo. High-performance orbit-following code ASCOT5 for Monte Carlo simulations in fusion plasmas, August 2019. arXiv:1908.02482 [physics.plasm-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  109. [117]

    BEAMS3D Neutral Beam Injection Model

    Matthew McMillan and Samuel A Lazerson. BEAMS3D Neutral Beam Injection Model. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 56(9):095019, September 2014

    2014

  110. [118]

    Jucker, W.A

    M. Jucker, W.A. Cooper, and J.P. Graves. Integrated modelling of ICRH in a quasi-axisymmetric stellarator.Nuclear Fusion, 52(1):013015, December 2011

    2011

  111. [119]

    T P Kiviniemi, T Kurki-Suonio, S Lazerson, S ¨Ak¨ aslompolo, P Ollus, L Sanchis, D Kulla, and the W7-X. Team. The role of SOL plasma in the confinement of NBI fast ions in W7-X. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 67(2):025034, January 2025

    2025

  112. [120]

    Ollus, R

    P. Ollus, R. Akers, B. Colling, H. El-Haroun, D. Keeling, T. Kurki-Suonio, R. Sharma, A. Snicker, J. Varje, and the MAST-U. team, and the EUROfusion MST1 team. Simulating the impact of charge exchange on beam ions in MAST-U.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 64(3):035014, F...

    2022

  113. [121]

    Lazerson and the DIII-D Team

    S.A. Lazerson and the DIII-D Team. Three-dimensional equilibrium reconstruction on the DIII-D device.Nuclear Fusion, 55(2):023009, February 2015

    2015

  114. [122]

    Goldberg.Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning

    D.E. Goldberg.Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley, 1989

    1989

  115. [123]

    H. E. Mynick, N. Pomphrey, and S. Ethier. Exploration of stellarator configuration space with global search methods.Physics of Plasmas, 9(3):869–876, March 2002. 38 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. Lazersonet al

    2002

  116. [124]

    The Large Helical Device (LHD) helical divertor.Nuclear Fusion, 34(3):387–399, March 1994

    N Ohyabu, T Watanabe, H Ji, H Akao, T Ono, T Kawamura, K Yamazaki, K Akaishi, N Inoue, A Komori, Y Kubota, N Noda, A Sagara, H Suzuki, O Motojima, M Fujiwara, and A Iiyoshi. The Large Helical Device (LHD) helical divertor.Nuclear Fusion, 34(3):387–399, March 1994

    1994

  117. [125]

    Feng and W7-X-team

    Y. Feng and W7-X-team. Review of magnetic islands from the divertor perspective and a simplified heat transport model for the island divertor.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 64(12):125012, November 2022

    2022

  118. [126]

    Bader, A

    A. Bader, A. H. Boozer, C. C. Hegna, S. A. Lazerson, and J. C. Schmitt. HSX as an example of a resilient non-resonant divertor.Physics of Plasmas, 24(3):032506, March 2017

    2017

  119. [127]

    D. A. Gates, D. P. Brennan, L. Delgado-Aparicio, Q. Teng, and R. B. White. Thermo-resistive disruptions and the tokamak density limit.Physics of Plasmas, 23(5):056113, May 2016

    2016

  120. [128]

    Stellarator and tokamak plasmas: a comparison.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 54(12):124009, November 2012

    P Helander, C D Beidler, T M Bird, M Drevlak, Y Feng, R Hatzky, F Jenko, R Kleiber, J H E Proll, Yu Turkin, and P Xanthopoulos. Stellarator and tokamak plasmas: a comparison.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 54(12):124009, November 2012

    2012

  121. [129]

    Fuchert, K

    G. Fuchert, K. J. Brunner, K. Rahbarnia, T. Stange, D. Zhang, J. Baldzuhn, S. A. Bozhenkov, C. D. Beidler, M. N. A. Beurskens, S. Brezinsek, R. Burhenn, H. Damm, A. Dinklage, Y. Feng, P. Hacker, M. Hirsch, Y. Kazakov, J. Knauer, A. Langenberg, H. P. Laqua, S. Lazerson, N. A. P...

    2020

  122. [130]

    Stellopt

    Samuel Lazerson, John Schmitt, Caoxiang Zhu, Joshua Breslau, and All STELLOPT Developers. Stellopt. [Computer Software] https://doi.org/10.11578/dc.20180627.6, may 2020

    2020 doi

  123. [131]

    H. E. Mynick, N. Pomphrey, and P. Xanthopoulos. Reducing turbulent transport in toroidal configurations via shapinga).Physics of Plasmas, 18(5):056101, April 2011

    2011

  124. [132]

    Turbulent optimization of toroidal configurations.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 56(9):094001, September 2014

    H Mynick, P Xanthopoulos, B Faber, M Lucia, M Rorvig, and J N Talmadge. Turbulent optimization of toroidal configurations.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 56(9):094001, September 2014

    2014

  125. [133]

    Turnbull, W.A

    A.D. Turnbull, W.A. Cooper, L.L. Lao, and Long-Poe Ku. Ideal MHD spectrum calculations for the ARIES-CS configuration.Nuclear Fusion, 51(12):123011, November 2011

    2011

  126. [134]

    Characterization of energy confinement in net-current free plasmas using the extended International Stellarator Database.Nuclear Fusion, 45(12):1684–1693, December 2005

    H Yamada, J.H Harris, A Dinklage, E Ascasibar, F Sano, S Okamura, J Talmadge, U Stroth, A Kus, S Murakami, M Yokoyama, C.D Beidler, V Tribaldos, K.Y Watanabe, and Y Suzuki. Characterization of energy confinement in net-current free plasmas using the extended International Stel...

    2005

  127. [135]

    Improved formulas for fusion cross-sections and thermal reactivities.Nuclear Fusion, 32(4):611–631, April 1992

    H.-S Bosch and G.M Hale. Improved formulas for fusion cross-sections and thermal reactivities.Nuclear Fusion, 32(4):611–631, April 1992

    1992

  128. [136]

    Richarson.NRL plasma formulary

    A.S. Richarson.NRL plasma formulary. Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, 2019

    2019

  129. [137]

    Improved calculation of synchrotron radiation losses in realistic tokamak plasmas.Nuclear Fusion, 41(6):665–678, June 2001

    F Albajar, J Johner, and G Granata. Improved calculation of synchrotron radiation losses in realistic tokamak plasmas.Nuclear Fusion, 41(6):665–678, June 2001

    2001

  130. [138]

    Synchrotron radiation loss in tokamaks of arbitrary geometry.Nuclear Fusion, 41(12):1755–1758, December 2001

    I Fidone, G Giruzzi, and G Granata. Synchrotron radiation loss in tokamaks of arbitrary geometry.Nuclear Fusion, 41(12):1755–1758, December 2001

    2001

  131. [139]

    Major results from the stellarator Wendelstein 7-AS.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 50(5):053001, May 2008

    M Hirsch, J Baldzuhn, C Beidler, R Brakel, R Burhenn, A Dinklage, H Ehmler, M Endler, V Erckmann, Y Feng, J Geiger, L Giannone, G Grieger, P Grigull, H-J Hartfuß, D Hartmann, R Jaenicke, R K¨ onig, H P Laqua, H Maaßberg, K McCormick, F Sardei, E Speth, U Stroth, F Wagner, A We...

    2008

  132. [140]

    Warmer, C

    F. Warmer, C. D. Beidler, A. Dinklage, Y. Turkin, and R. Wolf. Limits of Confinement Enhancement for Stellarators.Fusion Science and Technology, 68(4):727–740, November

  133. [141]

    39 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys

    eprint: https://doi.org/10.13182/FST15-131. 39 IOP PublishingPlasma Phys. Control. Fusionvv(2026) aaaaaa S. A. Lazersonet al

    2026 doi

  134. [142]

    The magnetic gradient scale length explains why certain plasmas require close external magnetic coils.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 66(2):025018, January 2024

    John Kappel, Matt Landreman, and Dhairya Malhotra. The magnetic gradient scale length explains why certain plasmas require close external magnetic coils.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 66(2):025018, January 2024

    2024

  135. [143]

    Global ideal magnetohydrodynamic stability analysis for the configurational space of Wendelstein 7–X.Physics of Plasmas, 3(6):2401–2410, June 1996

    Carolin N¨ uhrenberg. Global ideal magnetohydrodynamic stability analysis for the configurational space of Wendelstein 7–X.Physics of Plasmas, 3(6):2401–2410, June 1996

    1996

  136. [144]

    Computing local sensitivity and tolerances for stellarator physics properties using shape gradients.Nuclear Fusion, 58(7):076023, June 2018

    Matt Landreman and Elizabeth Paul. Computing local sensitivity and tolerances for stellarator physics properties using shape gradients.Nuclear Fusion, 58(7):076023, June 2018

    2018

  137. [145]

    Sissonen, S.A

    J. Sissonen, S.A. Lazerson, K. S¨ arkim¨ aki, A. Snicker, D. Douqa, M. Moscheni, and K. Revel. Fusion-born alpha particles and the role of full gyro-orbit simulation in the gauss giga stellarator: a study with ascot5. Manuscript in preparation, 2026

    2026

  138. [146]

    Garc´ ıa-Rega˜ na, I

    J.M. Garc´ ıa-Rega˜ na, I. Calvo, E. S´ anchez, H. Thienpondt, J.L. Velasco, and J.A. Capit´ an. Reduced electrostatic turbulence in the quasi-isodynamic stellarator configuration CIEMAT-QI4.Nuclear Fusion, 65(1):016036, December 2024

    2024

  139. [147]

    Mitigation of Alfv´ enic activity by 3D magnetic perturbations on NSTX.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 58(8):085003, August 2016

    G J Kramer, A Bortolon, N M Ferraro, D A Spong, N A Crocker, D S Darrow, E D Fredrickson, S Kubota, J-K Park, M Podest` a, W W Heidbrink, and the NSTX Team. Mitigation of Alfv´ enic activity by 3D magnetic perturbations on NSTX.Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 58(8):08500...

    2016

  140. [148]

    Samuel A. Lazerson, Joachim Geiger, David Kulla, Alexandra LeViness, Sergey Bozhenkov, Carsten Killer, Kunihiro Ogawa, Mitsutaka Isobe, Paul McNeely, Norbert Rust, Dirk Hartmann, and the W7-X. Team. Fast ion confinement in the presence of core magnetic islands in Wendelstein 7...

    2024

  141. [149]

    Doctoral Thesis, Technischen Universit¨ at Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2026

    David Kulla.Effect of magnetic islands on fast ions in Wendelstein 7-X and ASDEX Upgrade. Doctoral Thesis, Technischen Universit¨ at Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2026

    2026

  142. [150]

    Lazerson, David Kulla, Paul McNeely, Norbert Rust, Lucas van Ham, Dirk Hartmann, and W7-X Team

    Samuel A. Lazerson, David Kulla, Paul McNeely, Norbert Rust, Lucas van Ham, Dirk Hartmann, and W7-X Team. OPTEMIST: A neutral beam for measuring quasi-omnigenity in Wendelstein 7-X.Physics of Plasmas, 31(7):072506, July 2024

    2024

  143. [151]

    Aleynikova, Chang Liu, and N

    Yao Zhou, K. Aleynikova, Chang Liu, and N. M. Ferraro. Benign Saturation of Ideal Ballooning Instability in a High-Performance Stellarator.Physical Review Letters, 133(13):135102, September 2024

    2024

  144. [152]

    Weller, S

    A. Weller, S. Sakakibara, K. Y. Watanabe, K. Toi, J. Geiger, M. C. Zarnstorff, S. R. Hudson, A. Reiman, A. Werner, C. N¨ uhrenberg, S. Ohdachi, Y. Suzuki, H. Yamada, W7-AS Team, and LHD Team. Significance of MHD Effects in Stellarator Confinement.Fusion Science and Technology,...

    2006

  145. [153]

    Pandey, T

    A. Pandey, T. S. Pedersen, G. Fuchert, T. Szepesi, D. Zhang, T. Stange, A. Buzas, T. Romba, F. Reimold, V. Perseo, S. Kwak, G. Kocsis, G. Cseh, T. Gonda, G. Schlisio, M. Hirsch, N. Chaudhary, and W7-X team. Stable Small Plasmas at the Density Limit in the W7-X Stellarator.Phys...

    2025

  146. [154]

    Qarnot: Ready-to-use cloud hpc for engineers.https://qarnot.com,

    Qarnot Computing. Qarnot: Ready-to-use cloud hpc for engineers.https://qarnot.com,

  147. [155]

    Accessed: 31 May 2026. 40

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed July 13, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.