↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Explaining Cold-Pulse Dynamics in Tokamak Plasmas Using Local Turbulent Transport Models

Overview of attention for article published in Physical Review Letters, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary News Twitter Facebook Google+ Misc. Dimensions citations
Title
Explaining Cold-Pulse Dynamics in Tokamak Plasmas Using Local Turbulent Transport Models
Published in
Physical Review Letters, February 2018
DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.120.075001
Pubmed ID
29542943
Authors

P. Rodriguez-Fernandez, A. E. White, N. T. Howard, B. A. Grierson, G. M. Staebler, J. E. Rice, X. Yuan, N. M. Cao, A. J. Creely, M. J. Greenwald, A. E. Hubbard, J. W. Hughes, J. H. Irby, F. Sciortino

Abstract

A long-standing enigma in plasma transport has been resolved by modeling of cold-pulse experiments conducted on the Alcator C-Mod tokamak. Controlled edge cooling of fusion plasmas triggers core electron heating on time scales faster than an energy confinement time, which has long been interpreted as strong evidence of nonlocal transport. This Letter shows that the steady-state profiles, the cold-pulse rise time, and disappearance at higher density as measured in these experiments are successfully captured by a recent local quasilinear turbulent transport model, demonstrating that the existence of nonlocal transport phenomena is not necessary for explaining the behavior and time scales of cold-pulse experiments in tokamak plasmas.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 34%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Student > Master 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 18 56%
Energy 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 December 2019.
All research outputs
#759,520
of 21,343,339 outputs
Outputs from Physical Review Letters
#2,511
of 34,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,019
of 296,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physical Review Letters
#106
of 620 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,343,339 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,598 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 620 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.