Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 42 references

A new multi-species reactive-elastic kinetic model shows that in weakly coupled, early-time D-D fusion burns, product heating leaves fuel ions within about 0.1 percent of Maxwellian equilibrium, supporting the Maxwellian reactant approximat

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 06:54 UTC pith:M6YZMWZK

load-bearing objection A carefully built and honestly scoped continuum kinetic framework for self-consistent reactive D-D fusion; the null result is plausible but not yet established at the claimed 10^-3 precision because the Landau operator's own uncertainty is larger than the signal. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.21723 v1 pith:M6YZMWZK submitted 2026-07-23 physics.plasm-ph physics.comp-ph

A Multi-Species Reactive-Boltzmann Formulation for Self-Consistent Kinetic Simulation of Burning Fusion Plasmas

Mark Dunn , Jingwei Hu , Uri Shumlak This is my paper
classification physics.plasm-ph physics.comp-ph
keywords multi-species kinetic simulationreactive Boltzmann operatorfusion reactivityMaxwellian reactant approximationLandau collision operatorLenard-Bernstein operatorfast spectral methodD-D fusion burning plasma
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper builds a deterministic multi-species kinetic model in which fusion reactions and collisional relaxation feed back on each other: the fusion source and sink are computed from the actual velocity distribution of the fuel, not from an assumed Maxwellian. The model is used to test a widely debated hypothesis—that elastic collisions with energetic fusion products push fuel ions into a suprathermal tail. Running spatially homogeneous two- and three-species D-D burn simulations in a weakly coupled, early-time regime, the authors find the hypothesis fails there: the deuterium distribution stays within about one tenth of a percent of its equivalent Maxwellian, and the fusion reactivity changes by less than roughly 0.05 percent. The upshot is that the Maxwellian reactant approximation, which underlies most radiation-hydrodynamic burn models, is quantitatively justified in the regime studied, and the paper provides the computational machinery to find where that justification breaks down.

Core claim

Within a new continuum kinetic framework that treats fusion sources and sinks directly from the evolving reactant distribution function, the paper establishes—for the first time in a continuum (grid-based) kinetic setting—that fusion-product heating does not create a significant suprathermal reactant population in weakly coupled, spatially homogeneous, early-time D-D burning plasmas. Specifically, the relative Frobenius-norm deviation of the deuterium distribution from its equivalent Maxwellian remains O(10^-3), and the fusion reactivity ratio ⟨σv⟩/⟨σv⟩_M stays within O(10^-3) of unity, with reactivity enhancement below 0.05% in the near-physical S=1/2 case. Deviations become larger only in

What carries the argument

The central object is a multi-species reactive Boltzmann collision operator (specialized to effectively irreversible, exoergic fusion reactions) that evaluates fusion gain and loss directly from the reactant distribution functions using the relative-velocity-dependent fusion cross-section, coupled to small-angle elastic collision operators: the multi-species Landau operator and the Lenard-Bernstein operator. Because the reactive gain term is a weighted convolution, the authors accelerate it with a low-rank quadrature and fast Fourier spectral method, evaluating all collision integrals in three-dimensional velocity space at high order. The two scalar diagnostics—the relative Frobenius-norm de

Load-bearing premise

The null result rests entirely on the premise that elastic scattering is dominated by cumulative small-angle Coulomb collisions (Landau/LB operators); the simulations omit rare large-angle Coulomb collisions and nuclear elastic scattering, which have been shown to create suprathermal ions in moderately coupled plasmas.

What would settle it

Repeat the S=1/2 two-species D-D case using the full cut-off Boltzmann-Coulomb operator for elastic collisions (with large-angle scattering retained) or a PIC simulation that includes large-angle and nuclear elastic scattering at the same density and temperature; if the deuterium Frobenius-norm deviation from its equivalent Maxwellian rises above about one percent or the reactivity ratio moves more than one percent from unity, the paper's claim fails.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • In the weakly coupled, homogeneous, early-time D-D regime, reduced burn models that assume Maxwellian fuel ions are quantitatively reliable; including self-consistent non-Maxwellian kinetics changes reactivity by less than about 0.05 percent.
  • The Lenard-Bernstein operator, despite being cheap and conservative, cannot be trusted for non-thermal reactivity calculations: its velocity-independent collision frequency over-damps the fast-ion tail and overestimates inter-species thermalization.
  • The deterministic spectral method gives a noise-free, convergence-controlled way to test the Maxwellian assumption in regimes beyond D-D, where PIC noise would obscure deviations of order 0.1 percent.
  • When Coulomb collisions are artificially weakened, fusion heating does eventually push deuterium to χ≈2% and measurable reactivity enhancement, showing the assumption can fail if thermalization is slow relative to fusion.
  • Initial dynamics show a transient reactivity deficit from fusion depleting the energetic deuterium tail, followed by collisional replenishment once the 3He population builds up.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's own stated limitation suggests the conclusion may not survive inclusion of large-angle Coulomb collisions and nuclear elastic scattering, which have been shown to enhance suprathermal populations in moderately coupled D-T plasmas; whether they matter for D-D at these parameters is an open, testable question.
  • In a real burning plasma, spatial transport and confinement would set the balance between fusion heating and thermalization, so the homogeneous early-time result is a lower bound on the size of non-Maxwellian effects; the framework could be extended to inhomogeneous settings to test this.
  • A direct extension of this tool would be to run the same reactive-elastic operator with a prescribed kappa or beam-like distribution for one species, with the reaction now feeding back on that species, quantifying when a pre-existing non-Maxwellian population is sustained or erased by self-heating.
  • The reactivity-ratio diagnostic is a natural quantity to report alongside experimental neutron spectra; computing it for D-T parameters would give experimentalists a predicted signature for when Maxwellian-assumption errors become visible.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a deterministic continuum kinetic framework for self-consistent simulation of fusion reactions and elastic collisions in velocity space. It couples a multi-species reactive Boltzmann operator (based on Rossani--Spiga, with Bosch--Hale cross-sections for the D--D neutron branch) to either the multi-species Landau operator or the Lenard--Bernstein operator, both discretized with fast Fourier spectral methods. Verification includes spectral convergence against an analytic BKW-type two-species Landau solution (Tables 1--2), relaxation-rate comparison of Landau/LB against the cutoff Boltzmann--Coulomb operator (Sec. 5.2, Figs. 1--2), and moment-convergence of the reactive gain/loss operators (Sec. 5.3). The main application is spatially homogeneous, weakly coupled, early-time D--D systems: a two-species D/3He system and a three-species D/3He/e system with an artificial electron mass ratio, using an artificial scaling S of the elastic operators. The central claim is that the deuterium distribution remains within O(10^-3) of its equivalent Maxwellian and that the fusion reactivity ratio deviates from unity by O(10^-3) or less, thereby justifying the Maxwellian reactant approximation in the simulated regime.

Significance. If the null result were established, it would be a useful quantitative justification of reduced Maxwellian-reactivity models in this specific regime, and the continuum spectral method would offer a noise-free complement to Monte Carlo approaches. The paper has clear strengths: three levels of numerical verification, use of external experimental cross-section parameterizations, no parameter fitted to enforce the null result, and a transparent scalar diagnostic (chi and reactivity ratio) for deviations from Maxwellian. The principal weakness is that the claimed O(10^-3) effect is an order of magnitude smaller than the stated ~1% discrepancy between the Landau collision model used in the reactive runs and the more complete cutoff Boltzmann--Coulomb operator. The physical conclusion is therefore currently model-dependent rather than a demonstrated plasma property.

major comments (3)
  1. [Secs. 5.2, 6, and 7] The central numerical claim is not yet separated from collision-model uncertainty. In Sec. 5.2 and Fig. 2a, the Landau operator differs from the cutoff Boltzmann--Coulomb operator by roughly 1% in relative Frobenius norm for a non-reactive, far-from-Maxwellian relaxation. In the reactive runs, only the Landau operator is used; the LB operator is explicitly found unsuitable (Sec. 6.1). The reported null effect is chi = O(10^-3) and reactivity deviations below ~0.2% (Figs. 5 and 6), i.e., an order of magnitude smaller than the model discrepancy. Section 7 also acknowledges that rare large-angle Coulomb collisions and nuclear elastic scattering were neglected and cites [18] showing that such events enhance suprathermal populations in D-T. The paper does not quantify these contributions in D-D. At the quoted lnLambda ~ 15, non-logarithmic and large-angle contributions are ~1/lnLambda ~ 7% of
  2. [Sec. 6.1, Eq. (70), Fig. 6] The S=1/2 case is described as 'near-physical' because halving the neutron-branch-only reaction rate gives the same elastic-to-reactive ratio as including both branches at S=1. However, S=1/2 also halves the absolute elastic collision frequency. The deviation from Maxwellian is governed by the absolute competition between fusion tail depletion and Coulomb replenishment, not simply by the ratio of operator magnitudes. The artificial S scans in Fig. 6 show substantial S-dependence at later times (chi up to ~2% for the lowest S), so the S=1/2 results do not automatically represent the physical S=1 case. The authors should either justify the equivalence more carefully or state this as a limitation of the 'near-physical' interpretation.
  3. [Sec. 6.2, Sec. 7] The three-species simulations use an electron-to-deuterium mass ratio of 10. The text acknowledges that this 'does not capture the correct magnitude of the separation of timescales.' Yet the paper states that the addition of electrons 'does not qualitatively alter the velocity-space dynamics' and includes this in support of the general conclusion. The artificial mass ratio changes the energy-transfer cascade substantially, so these runs can only be consistency checks. The main conclusion should be explicitly restricted to the two-species D/3He model (or to the reduced-mass three-species model), and the physical electron case should be presented as future work.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 5.1] The spectral verification of the Landau operator is performed only for the Maxwell-molecule case (gamma=0), not for the Coulomb case (gamma=-3). The argument that gamma only enters the precomputed kernel (50) is plausible, but a direct convergence test for gamma=-3 would be more convincing, especially because the kernel is more singular.
  2. [Eq. (35)] The phase factor in the weight G^{ij,+}_{hk} is written as e^{i (pi/L) |q^{hk}_{ij}|( ... )} with unbalanced parentheses; please restructure the notation for clarity.
  3. [Sec. 6.1, Fig. 6] The text says 'reactivity enhancement of less than 0.05% for the S=1/2 case,' while Fig. 6b shows the reactivity ratio for the S=2.5e-3 case reaching about 1.0015 (0.15%) at late times. Please clarify which curve and which time interval the 0.05% statement refers to.
  4. [Sec. 6.1] The sentence 'The strongest collisionality (S=1/2) exhibits more pronounced non-Maxwellian features at early times than the weaker cases' is counterintuitive and should be explained. A reader would expect lower S (weaker collisions) to produce larger deviations because fusion depletion is relatively stronger.
  5. [Overall] The data availability statement says data are available 'upon reasonable request.' Given the paper's emphasis on deterministic, reproducible, noise-free results, making the code or at least the numerical setup available would strengthen the contribution.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the Maxwellian-deviation result is a simulated output, not a fitted or self-citational input.

full rationale

No circular step is present. The paper's central quantitative result—that the deuterium distribution deviates from its equivalent Maxwellian by O(10^-3) and the reactivity ratio by O(10^-3)—is an output of coupled reactive-elastic simulations, not an input or fit. The reactive operator is built from the Rossani-Spiga Boltzmann form and the external Bosch-Hale cross-section parameterization; no parameter is adjusted to produce small non-Maxwellian deviations. The main physical runs use the Landau operator, whose grazing-collision limit from the cut-off Boltzmann-Coulomb operator is an independent asymptotic result (Degond-Lucquin-Desreux), with only the Coulomb logarithm as an input. The Lenard-Bernstein operator, whose collision frequencies are calibrated to Boltzmann-Coulomb moment relaxation rates, is explicitly shown to be unsuitable for non-Maxwellian reactivity calculations and is not used for the main conclusion. The scalar diagnostics χ and the reactivity ratio are measured quantities, not minimized or fitted targets. The author-overlapping citations ([20], [21], [35]) provide an analytic test case, a modeling option, and a diagnostic definition; none supplies a load-bearing premise, a uniqueness theorem, or an ansatz that already contains the conclusion. The skeptic's concern that the Landau-vs-Boltzmann-Coulomb discrepancy is about 1% while the claimed effect is about 0.1% is a modeling-uncertainty limitation, acknowledged in Sec. 7, not a circularity: the discrepancy does not make the output equivalent to the input. Therefore the derivation chain is self-contained with respect to circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 10 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on several disclosed modeling assumptions: Boltzmann binary-collision kinetics, irreversible single-branch D-D, Bosch-Hale cross-sections, Landau/grazing-only elastic scattering, the S=1/2 physical-equivalence inference, an artificial electron mass, and a homogeneous transport-free geometry. No free parameter is fit to produce the null result; the only calibrated quantities (LB lambda_ij and weights) belong to a model the paper rejects for the central question. The load-bearing choice most likely to change the conclusion if relaxed is the small-angle-only elastic scattering, per the paper's own Sec. 7 caveat.

free parameters (3)
  • S (elastic collision operator scaling) = 1/2, 2.5e-2, 2.5e-3
    Hand-set factor reducing the elastic Coulomb operator's strength (Eq. 70, 74) so explicit Landau time-stepping is tractable; the physical case S=1 is 5 orders of magnitude too stiff. S=1/2 with only the neutron branch is argued to match the physical elastic/reactive ratio of S=1 with both branches (Sec. 6.1).
  • electron-to-deuteron mass ratio = 0.1 (10x physical electron mass)
    Artificial value in the three-species runs (Sec. 6.2) chosen for tractability; the paper states it preserves qualitative energy-cascade structure but not the magnitude of the timescale separation.
  • LB collision frequencies lambda_ij and mixture weights (alpha, beta, gamma) = via Eq. 26-27 from moment matching
    Calibrated to match near-equilibrium Boltzmann-Coulomb momentum/temperature relaxation rates (Sec. 3.2). Not load-bearing for the central claim because the LB operator's results are shown to be inadequate and the Landau runs carry the conclusion.
axioms (10)
  • domain assumption Uncorrelated, instantaneous binary interactions (classical Boltzmann kinetic theory); quantum effects enter only through the cross-section
    The reactive and elastic operators assume this (Sec. 2); stated as the basis of the framework.
  • domain assumption D-D fusion treated as effectively irreversible; only the neutron branch is modeled
    Sec. 2.1 and Sec. 6.1; inverse reactions are neglected and the proton branch is dropped, with the argument that S=1/2 restores the physical elastic/reactive ratio.
  • domain assumption Bosch-Hale parameterization gives the D-D differential cross-section
    Eq. 41 uses the Bosch-Hale S-factor [31] — an experimental/empirical fit input, not derived here.
  • domain assumption Small-angle (grazing) collision limit is sufficient: the Landau operator captures the elastic physics
    Sec. 3.1 takes the epsilon-to-0 asymptotics of the cut-off Boltzmann-Coulomb operator; Sec. 7 admits large-angle Coulomb and nuclear elastic scattering are neglected although [18] shows they enhance suprathermal populations in D-T.
  • standard math Microscopic reversibility relating forward and reverse reactive kernels
    Eq. 7, from time symmetry of the Schrodinger/Liouville equation, cited to [23].
  • domain assumption Weak coupling: Coulomb cutoff epsilon defined via a characteristic thermal energy approximation
    Eq. 17 approximates mu_ij|v-w|^2 by (3/2)(T_i + T_j) to set the cutoff; standard plasma physics but an approximation.
  • domain assumption Equivalent Maxwellian diagnostic M_f (same n, u, T) is the right baseline for measuring deviation
    The chi diagnostic (Eq. 73, [35]) and the reactivity ratio measure deviation against this baseline; the conclusion 'small deviation' is relative to this choice.
  • ad hoc to paper Reduced electron mass preserves the qualitative energy-transfer cascade
    Sec. 6.2: mass ratio 10 is tractable but 'does not capture the correct magnitude of the separation of timescales'; three-species results are qualitative only.
  • ad hoc to paper Artificial S-scaling preserves the ordering of physical mechanisms
    Sec. 6.1: reducing S amplifies fusion relative to collisions and lets the slowing-down structure be observed; the physical case is inferred from S=1/2.
  • domain assumption Spatial homogeneity and absence of transport fields
    The study is spatially homogeneous (Eq. 2); late-time heating becomes unphysical without transport, which the paper acknowledges in Sec. 6.1 and Sec. 7.
invented entities (1)
  • Artificial electron species with deuteron-to-electron mass ratio of 10 no independent evidence
    purpose: Tractable three-species (D, 3He, e) simulations that preserve the qualitative structure of the energy-transfer cascade
    Not a physical claim — a numerical stand-in; the paper states it does not capture the correct magnitude of the timescale separation. A modified simulation species, not a new physics entity.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 22552 in / 26156 out tokens · 241955 ms · 2026-08-01T06:54:20.020384+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Discrepancies between experimental data and radiation-hydrodynamic models of burning plasmas at the National Ignition Facility have been attributed, in part, to possible deviations of reactant ion distributions from Maxwellian equilibrium. In particular, it has been hypothesized that the collisional relaxation of energetic fusion products with the bulk plasma may generate suprathermal ion populations not captured by reduced models. To assess this hypothesis in a fully kinetic setting, we present a multi-species reactive--elastic kinetic framework, in which fusion sources and sinks are evaluated directly from the reactant velocity distribution function with a reactive Boltzmann collision operator. For computational efficiency, elastic interactions are modeled in the small-angle collision limit using the Landau and Lenard--Bernstein collision operators, although the framework admits large-angle elastic scattering generalizations. The integro-differential collision operators are discretized with a fast Fourier spectral method, enabling efficient, high-order accuracy evaluation of reactive processes in three-dimensional velocity space and providing a deterministic alternative to Monte Carlo collision methods. Numerical experiments are performed for spatially homogeneous two- and three-species D--D fusion systems in weakly coupled, early-time regimes. We find that fusion product heating does not generate a significant suprathermal population in the reactant ions: deviation from the corresponding Maxwellian distribution remains small in both the Frobenius norm and the fusion reactivity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21723 by Jingwei Hu, Mark Dunn, Uri Shumlak.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Temperature evolution of the Maxwellian–Rosenbluth initial condition subject to the spa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Frobenius norm errors of the Landau (a) and LB (b) solutions relative to the Boltzmann– [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Spectral convergence of the loss operator measured using moment errors. (b) Spectral [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Fusion product heating in a burning D − 3He plasma with S = 2.5 × 10−3 . Elastic collisions are treated with the Landau (L) and Lenard–Bernstein (LB) operators; a time-step of ∆t = 2 × 10−7 s is used in both cases. (a) Normalized 3He velocity distribution function, (f (He)/(nHe(t)/v3 th)). The solution illustrates the expected formation and relaxation of the fusion-product distribution, forming a “slowing … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Normalized deviation of the deuterium distribution from its equivalent Maxwellian, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Deviation of the deuterium velocity distribution function from its equivalent Maxwellian [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Normalized helium-3 (3He) and electron (e) velocity distribution functions central slice with S = 2.5 × 10−3 at different times. The 3He solutions are given for both a Landau (L) and Lenard– Bernstein (LB) treatment of elastic collisions. This central velocity slice illustrates the formation and relaxation of the fusion-product distribution, exhibiting a “slowing down” profile with a thermal (“ash”) compon… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Normalized deviation of the deuterium distribution from its corresponding Maxwellian, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Temperature evolution in the three-species ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Deviation of the deuterium distribution function from its equivalent Maxwellian in two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Degond, Pierre , year =. Rate. Kinetic

  2. [2]

    Journal of Statistical Physics , author =

    A. Journal of Statistical Physics , author =. 2017 , pages =. doi:10.1007/s10955-017-1824-9 , abstract =

    doi:10.1007/s10955-017-1824-9 2017

  3. [3]

    Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences , author =

    The. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences , author =. 1992 , pages =. doi:10.1142/S0218202592000119 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218202592000119 1992

  4. [4]

    A Multiscale Eulerian Vlasov-Rosenbluth-Fokker-Planck Algorithm for Thermonuclear Burning Plasmas

    A. 2025 , keywords =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2506.06672 , abstract =. 2506.06672 , author =

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.06672 2025

  5. [5]

    , year =

    Cercignani, C. , year =. The

  6. [6]

    Journal of Computational Physics , author =

    Fast. Journal of Computational Physics , author =. 2000 , pages =. doi:10.1006/jcph.2000.6612 , language =

    arXiv 2000

  7. [7]

    Physics of Plasmas , author =

    The development of a high-resolution. Physics of Plasmas , author =. 2022 , pages =. doi:10.1063/5.0100985 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0100985 2022

  8. [8]

    Journal of Computational Physics , author =

    A review of low-rank methods for time-dependent kinetic simulations , volume =. Journal of Computational Physics , author =. 2025 , pages =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2025.114191 , language =

    arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Theory of

    Grad, Harold , editor =. Theory of. Rarefied

  10. [10]

    Journal of Computational Physics , author =

    Computationally efficient high-fidelity plasma simulations by coupling multi-species kinetic and multi-fluid models on decomposed domains , volume =. Journal of Computational Physics , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112073 , language =

    arXiv 2023

  11. [11]

    Journal of Computational Physics , author =

    A conservative spectral method for the. Journal of Computational Physics , author =. 2014 , pages =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2014.03.035 , language =

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2014.03.035 2014

  12. [12]

    SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , author =

    Implicit. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , author =. 2025 , pages =. doi:10.1137/24M165421X , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1137/24m165421x 2025

  13. [13]

    Journal of Computational Physics , author =

    A fast. Journal of Computational Physics , author =. 2020 , pages =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109806 , language =

    arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    Nuclear Fusion , author =

    Improved formulas for fusion cross-sections and thermal reactivities , volume =. Nuclear Fusion , author =. 1992 , pages =. doi:10.1088/0029-5515/32/4/I07 , number =

    doi:10.1088/0029-5515/32/4/i07 1992

  15. [15]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , author =

    A discontinuous. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering , author =. 2019 , pages =. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.04.015 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.04.015 2019

  16. [16]

    SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing , author =

    A. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing , author =. 2017 , pages =. doi:10.1137/16M1096001 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1137/16m1096001 2017

  17. [17]

    The Physics of Fluids , author =

    Energy and. The Physics of Fluids , author =. 1963 , pages =. doi:10.1063/1.1710963 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1710963 1963

  18. [18]

    Asymptotic

    Degond, Pierre , year =. Asymptotic. Material. doi:10.1016/B978-008044535-9/50002-9 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-008044535-9/50002-9

  19. [19]

    Journal of Computational Physics , author =

    A class of asymptotic-preserving schemes for kinetic equations and related problems with stiff sources , volume =. Journal of Computational Physics , author =. 2010 , pages =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2010.06.017 , abstract =

    doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2010.06.017 2010

  20. [20]

    Communications in Mathematical Physics , author =

    A. Communications in Mathematical Physics , author =. 2022 , pages =. doi:10.1007/s00220-022-04367-0 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1007/s00220-022-04367-0 2022

  21. [21]

    Journal of Statistical Physics , author =

    A. Journal of Statistical Physics , author =. 2025 , pages =. doi:10.1007/s10955-025-03436-7 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1007/s10955-025-03436-7 2025

  22. [22]

    Acta Applicandae Mathematicae , author =

    A. Acta Applicandae Mathematicae , author =. 2024 , pages =. doi:10.1007/s10440-024-00692-9 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1007/s10440-024-00692-9 2024

  23. [23]

    Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications , author =

    A note on the kinetic theory of chemically reacting gases , volume =. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications , author =. 1999 , pages =. doi:10.1016/S0378-4371(99)00336-2 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1016/s0378-4371(99)00336-2 1999

  24. [24]

    Physical Review E , author =

    Particle-in-cell simulations of burning inertial confinement fusion capsule implosions , volume =. Physical Review E , author =. 2025 , pages =. doi:10.1103/zwjx-jbxl , language =

    doi:10.1103/zwjx-jbxl 2025

  25. [25]

    Physical Review Letters , author =

    Enhancement to. Physical Review Letters , author =. 2025 , pages =. doi:10.1103/5nll-y8rx , language =

    doi:10.1103/5nll-y8rx 2025

  26. [26]

    Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion , author =

    Fusion reactivities with drift bi-. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1088/1361-6587/acc8f9 , abstract =

    doi:10.1088/1361-6587/acc8f9 2023

  27. [27]

    Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics , author =

    Concepts for a. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics , author =. 2018 , pages =. doi:10.1134/S1063776118110171 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1134/s1063776118110171 2018

  28. [28]

    Physical Review E , author =

    Enhancement of fusion reactivities using non-. Physical Review E , author =. 2024 , pages =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.109.025207 , language =

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.109.025207 2024

  29. [29]

    Nature Physics , author =

    Burning plasma surprise , volume =. Nature Physics , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1038/s41567-022-01820-8 , language =

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-022-01820-8 2023

  30. [30]

    2023 , pages =

    Nuclear Fusion , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ace2d8 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/ace2d8 2023

  31. [31]

    Nature , author =

    Burning plasma achieved in inertial fusion , volume =. Nature , author =. 2022 , pages =. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04281-w , abstract =

    doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04281-w 2022

  32. [32]

    Nuclear Fusion , author =

    Deuterium temperature, drift velocity, and density measurements in non-. Nuclear Fusion , author =. 2018 , pages =. doi:10.1088/1741-4326/aaa6e1 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/1741-4326/aaa6e1 2018

  33. [33]

    Nature Physics , author =

    Evidence for suprathermal ion distribution in burning plasmas , volume =. Nature Physics , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1038/s41567-022-01809-3 , language =

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-022-01809-3 2023

  34. [34]

    Physics of Plasmas , author =

    Enhancement of the fusion reactivity due to the. Physics of Plasmas , author =. 2025 , pages =. doi:10.1063/5.0276381 , abstract =

    doi:10.1063/5.0276381 2025

  35. [35]

    Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion , author =

    Numerical tools for burning plasmas , volume =. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1088/1361-6587/acce68 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6587/acce68 2023

  36. [36]

    2000 , pages =

    The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , author =. 2000 , pages =. doi:10.1086/317361 , language =

    doi:10.1086/317361 2000

  37. [37]

    Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations , author =

    A. Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations , author =. 2013 , pages =. doi:10.1002/num.21746 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1002/num.21746 2013

  38. [38]

    Journal of Computational Physics , author =

    A class of asymptotic-preserving schemes for the. Journal of Computational Physics , author =. 2011 , pages =. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2011.04.002 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2011.04.002 2011

  39. [40]

    Fusion Science and Technology , author =

    Fusion. Fusion Science and Technology , author =. 2024 , pages =. doi:10.1080/15361055.2023.2198049 , abstract =

    arXiv 2024

  40. [41]

    Physical Review Letters , author =

    Evidence of. Physical Review Letters , author =. 2023 , pages =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.075101 , language =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.075101 2023

  41. [42]

    Physics of Plasmas , author =

    Three-dimensional. Physics of Plasmas , author =. 2001 , note =. doi:10.1063/1.1356740 , abstract =

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1356740 2001

  42. [43]

    SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing , author =

    Recompression of. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing , author =. 2017 , pages =. doi:10.1137/16M1093896 , language =

    work page doi:10.1137/16m1093896 2017