Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 45 references

First Demonstration of Resonant Pitch-Angle Scattering of Relativistic Electrons by Externally-Launched Helicon Waves

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports the first experimental demonstration that externally launched helicon waves can resonantly pitch-angle scatter relativistic electrons in a tokamak plasma, capping their energy near 8 MeV even while the accelerating…

desk verdict First experiment to show externally launched helicon waves scatter relativistic electrons, but the quantitative claim of an 8 MeV resonance is undercut by an inconsistent cyclotron frequency and a single estimated k_parallel. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19279 v1 pith:OMXIXQBN submitted 2025-05-25 physics.plasm-ph

H. Choudhury , A. Battey , C. Paz-Soldan , J. Lestz , N. Leuthold , A. Lvovskiy , C. Marini , J. Barr
show 7 more authors
W. Heidbrink D. Spong S. Tang B. Van Compernolle Q. Zhang Y. Zhang X. Tang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.plasm-ph
keywords runawayelectronsheliconwavespitch-anglescatteringcyclotronresonancetokamakrelativisticelectronmitigationhardX-raydiagnosticsDIII-D
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 reports the first experimental evidence that radio-frequency helicon waves launched from outside the plasma can resonantly scatter relativistic electrons, the 'runaway' electrons that form in tokamaks. In low-density DIII-D discharges, turning on a 476 MHz helicon wave made the hard-X-ray-inferred runaway population stop growing and removed electrons above roughly 8 MeV, even though the toroidal electric field that drives runaway growth was unchanged. The authors attribute the effect to the normal cyclotron resonance, in which the Doppler-shifted wave frequency matches the relativistic electron cyclotron frequency, and to the increased synchrotron damping that follows pitch-angle scattering. If correct, the result opens a wave-based route to limiting the maximum energy of runaway populations, complementing mitigation strategies that rely on massive impurity injection.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the normal cyclotron resonance condition between a helicon wave and a relativistic electron, written in the paper as $\omega - \mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{v} = l\Omega/\gamma$ with $l=+1$. The wave's parallel wave number $k_\parallel$ is fixed by the antenna's $n_\parallel=3$ and a toroidal-symmetry upshift ($2.27/1.67$) to $40\ \mathrm{m}^{-1}$ at the magnetic axis, placing the resonance at about 8 MeV for the nearly anti-parallel, low-pitch runaways of the experiment. The mechanism that carries the argument is pitch-angle scattering: a resonant electron's pitch angle increases, which enhances its synchrotron radiation and hence its energy loss, so the distribution is pushed to lower energies. The paper uses the same resonance surface to predict which phase-space electrons are affected and then compares that prediction with hard-X-ray, electron-cyclotron-emission, and synchrotron-camera measurements.

What would settle it

Measure the helicon's parallel wavenumber inside the plasma (for example by scanning the launched $n_\parallel$ from 2 to 4 while holding other parameters fixed) and track the energy at which the hard-X-ray spectrum first drops. If the drop boundary does not move with the predicted resonance energy—or if reversing the launch direction removes the effect—the attribution to the normal cyclotron resonance would be falsified, even if the mitigation effect itself survived.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms: helicon waves (right-handed fast waves at 476 MHz with nominal parallel refractive index $n_\parallel=3$ at the antenna) satisfy the normal wave-particle cyclotron resonance $\omega - \mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{v} = \Omega/\gamma$ for electrons near 8 MeV in the DIII-D low-density Ohmic scenario. With $k_\parallel = 40\ \mathrm{m}^{-1}$ at the magnetic axis, the resonance maps to the phase-space region where most runaways sit. After the antenna turns on, the hard X-ray flux, used as an energy-weighted proxy for the confined runaway population, stops growing; energy-resolved gamma-ray-imager spectra show the $>7$ MeV component falling below the noise floor while the $<4$ MeV component increases; non-thermal electron-cyclotron emission rises; and a bright high-field-side synchrotron crescent appears on the first pulse. A multi-shot database shows post-helicon growth rates break from the pre-existing $E/E_c$ trend: populations stop growing or decay despite $E/E_c$ remaining high enough to drive exponential growth without waves. The authors conclude the maximum runaway energy was limited to less than about 8 MeV by resonant pitch-angle scattering.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on a single assumed number: the wave's parallel wavenumber at the plasma center, $k_\parallel = 40\ \mathrm{m}^{-1}$, obtained from the antenna's $n_\parallel=3$ and a geometric upshift; if reflections or mode conversion change that wavenumber, the resonance energy shifts and the observed high-energy drop is no longer tied to the normal cyclotron resonance.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, the maximum energy of a runaway population can be set by choosing the wave frequency and parallel wave number, not just by raising the critical electric field.
  • The flattening of hard X-ray growth under helicon, with unchanged $E/E_c$, provides a control handle for runaway mitigation that does not rely on increasing plasma density.
  • Because the technique caps energy rather than current, it avoids sudden current drops that would induce large toroidal electric fields and accelerate further avalanches.
  • The same resonance-based scattering should be testable across a range of energies by scanning the launched $n_\parallel$ or the wave frequency.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension the paper does not pursue is to measure the scattering rate directly during the first 100 ms pulse and compare it with the avalanche growth rate at the same field.
  • Scanning the launched $n_\parallel$ (or measuring the in-plasma $k_\parallel$ spectrum) would test whether the energy at which the hard-X-ray drop begins tracks the predicted resonance; a mismatch would not disprove the mitigation effect but would shift the attribution away from the nominal 8 MeV normal-cyclotron resonance.
  • The same mechanism should apply to other externally launched fast waves in any toroidal device with a suitable low-density runaway scenario, since only the dispersion and resonance geometry matter.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first experimental evidence that externally launched helicon waves resonantly pitch-angle scatter relativistic electrons in a tokamak. In DIII-D low-density Ohmic discharges, turning on a 476 MHz helicon antenna causes the hard x-ray (HXR) inferred runaway population to stop growing, non-thermal ECE to rise, a synchrotron crescent to appear, and the gamma-ray imager to record a drop in >7 MeV photons and an increase in <4 MeV photons. Using a computed resonance condition with k_parallel=40 m^-1 at the magnetic axis, the authors identify approximately 8 MeV as the normal cyclotron resonance energy. A multi-shot database shows that post-helicon HXR growth rates are reduced relative to the pre-helicon trend with normalized electric field. The paper concludes that helicon waves limit the maximum runaway electron energy through resonant pitch-angle scattering and increased synchrotron damping.

Significance. If the attribution holds, this is an important result for runaway electron mitigation: it proposes a physics-based, non-disruptive method that directly targets the maximum runaway energy, and the supporting diagnostic suite (HXR, ECE, synchrotron imaging, gamma-ray imager) is unusually complete. The resonance energy is computed from basic wave and plasma parameters rather than fitted to the observed spectral break, and the multi-shot comparison strengthens the empirical case. The main caveat is that the quantitative link to the normal cyclotron resonance rests on a single estimated k_parallel value and on an internally inconsistent cyclotron frequency in the text; until these are resolved, the paper demonstrates a strong wave-particle interaction but not uniquely the normal cyclotron resonance at 8 MeV.

major comments (3)
  1. [§Experimental Design] The central quantitative claim that the >7 MeV HXR deficit corresponds to the normal cyclotron resonance at approximately 8 MeV depends entirely on the estimated k_parallel=40 m^-1 at the magnetic axis. This value is obtained from the antenna n_parallel=3 scaled by the geometric factor 2.27/1.67, with k_perp neglected, and the manuscript itself states that reflections and mode conversions cannot be ruled out and that the wave path is likely complex. Since the resonance energy in Eq. (2) is directly set by k_parallel, a realistic uncertainty or a measured/modeled k_parallel spectrum is required to support the specific attribution; otherwise the observed spectral change is consistent with resonant scattering at some other energy or via a different mechanism.
  2. [§Experimental Design] The manuscript states that Omega/(2*pi) is approximately 6.5 GHz for B_t=1.4 T. The nonrelativistic electron cyclotron frequency at 1.4 T is f_ce approximately 39.2 GHz. Inserting the stated 6.5 GHz into Eq. (2) with k_parallel=40 m^-1 and v approximately c gives a resonance kinetic energy near 0.9 MeV, not 8 MeV; the 8 MeV value follows only if the correct 39.2 GHz is used. This internal inconsistency must be corrected and the resonance energy recomputed before the quantitative claim can be independently checked.
  3. [§Experimental Results, Fig. 4] The agreement between the measured spectral break (decrease above 7 MeV, increase below 4 MeV) and the predicted 8 MeV resonance is asserted visually, without a synthetic diagnostic or propagation of the k_parallel uncertainty. Because the HXR spectrum integrates over a line of sight and over electrons with a range of pitch angles, the observed break does not uniquely fingerprint the normal cyclotron resonance. A quantitative comparison, such as a predicted spectral shape or resonance width as a function of k_parallel, is needed to substantiate the statement that the reduction in high-energy REs 'agrees well with the predicted wave-particle resonance.'
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] Calling xi = v_parallel/v an 'inverse pitch-angle metric' is nonstandard; xi is the cosine of the pitch angle and is not 'inverse.' Please clarify the terminology.
  2. [Fig. 4] The y-axis label 'log10 /s' is unclear; specify whether the plotted quantity is normalized counts per second or a log-scaled rate, and state the normalization.
  3. [Fig. 2 panel (a)] The label 'thelicon' appears to be a typo; it should likely be 't_helicon' or similar.
  4. [§Experimental Design] The sentence 'To summarize, these design considerations lead to...' would benefit from a small table or diagram relating the directions of B_t, I_p, launched waves, and RE motion, because the counter-clockwise/clockwise wording is easy to misread.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the 8 MeV resonance energy is independently computed from antenna n_parallel=3, toroidal upshift, and Eq. (2); the observed HXR drop is an empirical outcome, not an input to the calculation.

full rationale

The central claim is an experimental observation supported by independent diagnostics (HXR scintillator, gamma-ray imager, ECE radiometer, synchrotron camera). The predicted resonance location is obtained from Eq. (2) using k_parallel = 40 m^-1, which is derived from the antenna's nominal n_parallel = 3 and the geometric toroidal upshift factor 2.27/1.67, not selected to match the measured spectral downturn. The paper explicitly notes that reflections and mode conversions 'cannot be ruled out,' but that admission weakens the k_parallel estimate rather than making the conclusion an input to the inference. The multi-shot database borrows prior data from Ref. [9], which includes an author, but the post-helicon growth rates are measured after the wave application and are compared with, not fitted to, that database. No parameter is fitted and then renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no known result is merely relabeled. Two numerical inconsistencies appear in the text (c/omega approximately 10 m should be approximately 0.10 m for the stated frequency, and Omega/(2 pi) approximately 6.5 GHz is inconsistent with B_t = 1.4 T, whose cyclotron frequency is approximately 39.2 GHz); these are correctness and reproducibility concerns about the quantitative attribution and do not constitute circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard resonance physics and a set of domain assumptions about wave propagation and diagnostics. The only hand-chosen quantitative input is the estimated k_parallel = 40 m^-1, which sets the resonance energy. No new physical entities are introduced. The paper does not fit parameters to the observed spectral drop, so the circularity burden is low, but the sensitivity of the conclusion to the k_parallel estimate is the main fragility.

free parameters (1)
  • parallel wavenumber k_parallel at magnetic axis = 40 m^-1
    Estimated from antenna n_parallel = 3 and geometric upshift factor 2.27/1.67, not directly measured. The resonance energy (~8 MeV) depends on this value; the paper acknowledges reflections and mode conversion could alter the actual k_parallel spectrum.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The wave-particle resonance condition is omega - k dot v = l * Omega / gamma (Eq. 2).
    Standard cyclotron resonance condition for a wave interacting with a gyrating particle, used throughout the paper to locate the resonance in phase space.
  • domain assumption The effect of k_perp can be neglected, so k dot v is approximately k_parallel * v_parallel.
    Stated in Experimental Design: 'Since the parallel velocity of a RE is much greater than its perpendicular velocity, the effect of k_perp in the resonance condition can be ignored.' This simplifies the resonance calculation.
  • domain assumption Toroidal mode number is conserved, so k_parallel upshifts by the ratio of antenna major radius to magnetic-axis major radius (2.27/1.67).
    Used to compute k_parallel = 40 m^-1 at the magnetic axis. This single-pass, ray-like propagation assumption is an approximation, as the paper notes the actual wave path may involve reflections and mode conversions.
  • domain assumption The helicon wave is weakly damped on the thermal plasma and can make multiple passes until absorbed by REs or mode converted.
    Stated in Experimental Design to justify that the wave reaches and interacts with the RE population despite the complex propagation.
  • domain assumption Hard X-ray flux serves as an energy-weighted proxy for the confined RE population.
    Stated in Experimental Results, citing Refs. [30,37]. The interpretation of HXR flattening as RE growth suppression relies on this proxy.
  • domain assumption The critical field E_C (Eq. 1) and the normalization E/E_C are valid characterizations of the runaway threshold in this plasma.
    Standard runaway-electron theory, used to argue that the electric field remains above the threshold for RE growth even after helicon application.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First Demonstration of Resonant Pitch-Angle Scattering of Relativistic Electrons by Externally-Launched Helicon Waves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OMXIXQBN

@misc{pith2026250519279,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First Demonstration of Resonant Pitch-Angle Scattering of Relativistic Electrons by Externally-Launched Helicon Waves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OMXIXQBN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19279}
}
read the original abstract

Helicon waves satisfying the normal wave-particle cyclotron resonance are observed to limit the growth and maximum energy of relativistic electrons (REs) in low-density Ohmic DIII-D tokamak plasmas. Following the application of helicon waves, pitch-angle scattering of high-energy REs causes an increase in both synchrotron and electron-cyclotron emissions. The hard x-ray emission, a proxy for the RE population, ceases to grow; and energy-resolved hard x-ray measurements also show a striking decrease in the number of high-energy REs (above the resonance at approximately \SI{8}{MeV}) to below the noise floor. This occurs despite the toroidal electric field remaining high enough to drive exponential RE growth in the absence of helicon waves. These results open new directions for limiting the maximum energy of RE populations in laboratory and fusion plasmas.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.19279 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. a) The resonances between helicon waves of 476 MHz [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Time traces of shot 201948. Panel (a) shows the ap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Top inset, an R-Z image of a RE-synchrotron emission [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The exponential HXR growth rate measured across [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A. H. Boozer, Runaway electrons and ITER, Nuclear Fu- sion 57, 056018 (2017), publisher: IOP Publishing

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    A. H. Boozer, Pivotal issues on relativistic electrons in ITER, Nuclear Fusion 58, 036006 (2018), publisher: IOP Publishing

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    A. H. Boozer, Theory of runaway electrons in ITER: Equations, important parameters, and implications for mitigation, Physics of Plasmas 22, 032504 (2015)

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    E. M. Hollmann, P. B. Aleynikov, T. F¨ ul¨ op, D. A. Humphreys, V. A. Izzo, M. Lehnen, V. E. Lukash, G. Papp, G. Pautasso, F. Saint-Laurent, and J. A. Snipes, Status of research toward the ITER disruption mitigation system, Physics of Plasmas 22, 021802 (2014)

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    Lehnen, K

    M. Lehnen, K. Aleynikova, P. B. Aleynikov, D. J. Campbell, P. Drewelow, N. W. Eidietis, Y. Gasparyan, R. S. Granetz, Y. Gribov, N. Hartmann, E. M. Holl- mann, V. A. Izzo, S. Jachmich, S. H. Kim, M. Koˇ can, H. R. Koslowski, D. Kovalenko, U. Kruezi, A. Loarte, S. Maruyama, G. F. Matthews, P. B. Parks, G. Pau- tasso, R. A. Pitts, C. Reux, V. Riccardo, R. Ro...

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    J. W. Connor and R. J. Hastie, Relativistic limitations on runaway electrons, Nuclear Fusion 15, 415 (1975)

    work page 1975

  7. [7]

    J. P. Freidberg, Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007)

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    B. N. Breizman, P. Aleynikov, E. M. Hollmann, and M. Lehnen, Physics of runaway electrons in tokamaks, Nuclear Fusion 59, 083001 (2019), publisher: IOP Pub- lishing

    work page 2019

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Paz-Soldan, N

    C. Paz-Soldan, N. W. Eidietis, R. Granetz, E. M. Holl- mann, R. A. Moyer, J. C. Wesley, J. Zhang, M. E. Austin, N. A. Crocker, A. Wingen, and Y. Zhu, Growth and decay of runaway electrons above the critical electric field under quiescent conditions, Physics of Plasmas 21, 0225...

    2014

  2. [10]

    R. S. Granetz, B. Esposito, J. H. Kim, R. Koslowski, M. Lehnen, J. R. Martin-Solis, C. Paz-Soldan, T. Rhee, J. C. Wesley, L. Zeng, and ITPA MHD Group, An ITPA joint experiment to study runaway electron generation and suppressiona), Physics of Plasmas21, 072506 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    Aleynikov and B

    P. Aleynikov and B. N. Breizman, Theory of Two Thresh- old Fields for Relativistic Runaway Electrons, Physical Review Letters 114, 155001 (2015), publisher: American Physical Society

    2015

  4. [12]

    C. Liu, E. Hirvijoki, G.-Y. Fu, D. P. Brennan, A. Bhat- tacharjee, and C. Paz-Soldan, Role of Kinetic Instabil- ity in Runaway-Electron Avalanches and Elevated Criti- cal Electric Fields, Physical Review Letters 120, 265001 (2018), publisher: American Physical Society

    2018

  5. [13]

    M. N. Rosenbluth and S. V. Putvinski, Theory for avalanche of runaway electrons in tokamaks, Nuclear Fu- sion 37, 1355 (1997)

    1997

  6. [14]

    Greenwald, Status of the SPARC physics basis, Jour- nal of Plasma Physics 86, 861860501 (2020)

    M. Greenwald, Status of the SPARC physics basis, Jour- nal of Plasma Physics 86, 861860501 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    D. G. Whyte, T. C. Jernigan, D. A. Humphreys, A. W. Hyatt, C. J. Lasnier, P. B. Parks, T. E. Evans, M. N. Rosenbluth, P. L. Taylor, A. G. Kellman, D. S. Gray, E. M. Hollmann, and S. K. Combs, Mitigation of Toka- mak Disruptions Using High-Pressure Gas Injection, Physical Revie...

    2002

  8. [16]

    Hollmann, M

    E. Hollmann, M. Austin, J. Boedo, N. Brooks, N. Com- maux, N. Eidietis, D. Humphreys, V. Izzo, A. James, T. Jernigan, A. Loarte, J. Martin-Solis, R. Moyer, J. Mu˜ noz-Burgos, P. Parks, D. Rudakov, E. Strait, C. Tsui, M. Van Zeeland, J. Wesley, and J. Yu, Con- trol and dissipat...

    2013

  9. [17]

    A. H. Boozer, Two beneficial non-axisymmetric pertur- bations to tokamaks, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fu- sion 53, 084002 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    C. Reux, C. Paz-Soldan, P. Aleynikov, V. Bandaru, O. Ficker, S. Silburn, M. Hoelzl, S. Jachmich, N. Eidietis, M. Lehnen, S. Sridhar, and JET contributors, Demon- stration of Safe Termination of Megaampere Relativistic Electron Beams in Tokamaks, Physical Review Letters 126, 17...

    2021

  11. [19]

    Paz-Soldan, C

    C. Paz-Soldan, C. Reux, K. Aleynikova, P. Aleynikov, V. Bandaru, M. Beidler, N. Eidietis, Y. Q. Liu, C. Liu, A. Lvovskiy, S. Silburn, L. Bardoczi, L. Bay- lor, I. Bykov, D. Carnevale, D. D.-C. Negrete, X. Du, O. Ficker, S. Gerasimov, M. Hoelzl, E. Hollmann, S. Jachmich, S. Jar...

    2021

  12. [20]

    Z. Guo, C. J. McDevitt, and X.-Z. Tang, Control of run- away electron energy using externally injected whistler waves, Physics of Plasmas 25, 032504 (2018), publisher: American Institute of Physics

    2018

  13. [21]

    Paz-Soldan, C

    C. Paz-Soldan, C. M. Cooper, P. Aleynikov, N. W. Ei- dietis, A. Lvovskiy, D. C. Pace, D. P. Brennan, E. M. Hollmann, C. Liu, R. A. Moyer, and D. Shiraki, Resolv- ing runaway electron distributions in space, time, and energy, Physics of Plasmas 25, 056105 (2018), publisher: Ame...

    2018

  14. [22]

    H. W. Bartels, Impact of runaway electrons, Fusion En- gineering and Design 23, 323 (1994)

    1994

  15. [23]

    Bhattacharjee and D

    A. Bhattacharjee and D. A. Gurnett, Waves in a Cold Plasma, in Introduction to Plasma Physics: With Space, Laboratory and Astrophysical Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017) 2nd ed

    2017

  16. [24]

    T. H. Stix, Waves in Plasmas(Springer Science & Busi- ness Media, 1992) google-Books-ID: OsOWJ8iHpmMC

    1992

  17. [25]

    R. I. Pinsker, Whistlers, helicons, and lower hybrid waves: The physics of radio frequency wave propagation and absorption for current drive via Landau damping, Physics of Plasmas 22, 090901 (2015), publisher: Amer- ican Institute of Physics

    2015

  18. [26]

    B. V. Compernolle, M. W. Brookman, C. P. Moeller, R. I. Pinsker, A. M. Garofalo, R. O’Neill, D. Geng, A. Nagy, J. P. Squire, K. Schultz, C. Pawley, D. Ponce, A. C. Torrezan, J. Lohr, B. Coriton, E. Hinson, R. Kalling, A. Marinoni, E. H. Martin, R. Nguyen, C. C. Petty, M. Porko...

    2021

  19. [27]

    R. I. Pinsker, R. Prater, C. P. Moeller, J. S. deGrassie, C. C. Petty, M. Porkolab, J. P. Anderson, A. M. Garo- falo, C. Lau, A. Nagy, D. C. Pace, H. Torreblanca, J. G. Watkins, and L. Zeng, Experiments on helicons in DIII- D—investigation of the physics of a reactor-relevant ...

    2018

  20. [28]

    Pinsker, B

    R. Pinsker, B. Van Compernolle, S. Tang, J. Lestz, C. Moeller, C. Petty, A. Dupuy, J. Squire, A. Garofalo, M. Porkolab, J. Rost, S. Baek, A. Nagy, S. Chowdhury, N. Crocker, G. Degrandchamp, A. McLean, K. Gage, A. Marinoni, E. Martin, G. Ronchi, and t. D.-D. Team, First high-po...

    2024

  21. [29]

    Spong, W

    D. Spong, W. Heidbrink, C. Paz-Soldan, X. Du, K. Thome, M. Van Zeeland, C. Collins, A. Lvovskiy, R. Moyer, M. Austin, D. Brennan, C. Liu, E. Jaeger, and C. Lau, First Direct Observation of Runaway-Electron- Driven Whistler Waves in Tokamaks, Physical Review Letters 120, 155002...

    2018

  22. [30]

    W. W. Heidbrink, C. Paz-Soldan, D. A. Spong, X. D. Du, K. E. Thome, M. E. Austin, A. Lvovskiy, R. A. Moyer, 7 R. I. Pinsker, and M. A. V. Zeeland, Low-frequency whistler waves in quiescent runaway electron plasmas, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion61, 014007 (2018), publish...

    2018

  23. [31]

    Paz-Soldan, C

    C. Paz-Soldan, C. Cooper, P. Aleynikov, D. Pace, N. Ei- dietis, D. Brennan, R. Granetz, E. Hollmann, C. Liu, A. Lvovskiy, R. Moyer, and D. Shiraki, Spatiotempo- ral Evolution of Runaway Electron Momentum Distribu- tions in Tokamaks, Physical Review Letters 118, 255002 (2017), ...

    2017

  24. [32]

    Piron, C

    L. Piron, C. Paz-Soldan, L. Pigatto, P. Zanca, O. Sauter, T. Putterich, P. Bettini, M. Bonotto, G. Cunningham, G. De Tommasi, N. Ferron, M. Gambrioli, G. Gra- ham, P. De Vries, Y. Gribov, Q. Hu, K. Kirov, N. Logan, M. Lennholm, M. Mattei, M. Maraschek, T. Markovic, G. Manduchi...

    2024

  25. [33]

    Paz-Soldan, Q

    C. Paz-Soldan, Q. Hu, N. Logan, and J.-K. Park, Non- disruptive error field identification based on magnetic island healing, Nuclear Fusion 62, 126007 (2022), pub- lisher: IOP Publishing

    2022

  26. [34]

    Paz-Soldan, R

    C. Paz-Soldan, R. Buttery, A. Garofalo, J. Hanson, R. La Haye, M. Lanctot, J. Park, W. Solomon, and E. Strait, The spectral basis of optimal error field cor- rection on DIII-D, Nuclear Fusion 54, 073013 (2014), publisher: IOP Publishing

    2014

  27. [35]

    Scoville, R

    J. Scoville, R. La Haye, A. Kellman, T. Osborne, R. Stambaugh, E. Strait, and T. Taylor, Locked modes in DIII-D and a method for prevention of the low density mode, Nuclear Fusion 31, 875 (1991)

    1991

  28. [36]

    Callen, Effects of 3D magnetic perturbations on toroidal plasmas, Nuclear Fusion 51, 094026 (2011)

    J. Callen, Effects of 3D magnetic perturbations on toroidal plasmas, Nuclear Fusion 51, 094026 (2011)

    2011

  29. [37]

    W. W. Heidbrink, Neutron fluctuation measurements on TFTR, Review of Scientific Instruments 57, 1769 (1986)

    1986

  30. [38]

    M. E. Austin and J. Lohr, Electron cyclotron emission radiometer upgrade on the DIII-D tokamak, Review of Scientific Instruments 74, 1457 (2003)

    2003

  31. [39]

    C. Liu, L. Shi, E. Hirvijoki, D. P. Brennan, A. Bhat- tacharjee, C. Paz-Soldan, and M. E. Austin, The effects of kinetic instabilities on the electron cyclotron emis- sion from runaway electrons, Nuclear Fusion 58, 096030 (2018), publisher: IOP Publishing

    2018

  32. [40]

    Hoppe, O

    M. Hoppe, O. Embr´ eus, C. Paz-Soldan, R. A. Moyer, and T. F¨ ul¨ op, Interpretation of runaway electron synchrotron and bremsstrahlung images, Nuclear Fusion 58, 082001 (2018), publisher: IOP Publishing

    2018

  33. [41]

    Marini, J

    C. Marini, J. A. Boedo, E. M. Hollmann, L. Chousal, J. Mills, Z. Popovi´ c, and I. Bykov, The fast camera (Fast- cam) imaging diagnostic systems on the DIII-D tokamak, Review of Scientific Instruments 94, 053509 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    D. C. Pace, C. M. Cooper, D. Taussig, N. W. Eidi- etis, E. M. Hollmann, V. Riso, M. A. Van Zeeland, and M. Watkins, Gamma ray imager on the DIII-D tokamak, Review of Scientific Instruments 87, 043507 (2016)

    2016

  35. [43]

    C. M. Cooper, D. C. Pace, C. Paz-Soldan, N. Commaux, N. W. Eidietis, E. M. Hollmann, and D. Shiraki, Apply- ing the new gamma ray imager diagnostic to measure- ments of runaway electron Bremsstrahlung radiation in the DIII-D Tokamak (invited), Review of Scientific In- strument...

    2016

  36. [44]

    Lvovskiy, C

    A. Lvovskiy, C. Paz-Soldan, N. Eidietis, A. Dal Molin, M. Nocente, C. Cooper, D. Rigamonti, M. Tardocchi, and D. Taussig, Upgrades to the gamma ray imager on DIII- D enabling access to high flux hard x-Ray measurements during the runaway electron plateau phase (invited), Re- v...

    2022

  37. [45]

    Wasserman, All of statistics: a concise course in sta- tistical inference, Springer texts in statistics (Springer, New York, 2004) medium: electronic resource, Chapter 23

    L. Wasserman, All of statistics: a concise course in sta- tistical inference, Springer texts in statistics (Springer, New York, 2004) medium: electronic resource, Chapter 23

    2004

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.