2022
DOI: 10.1038/s41567-022-01602-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Disruption prediction with artificial intelligence techniques in tokamak plasmas

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
45
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Three were indeed installed in JET tokamak real time network and one, called APODIS, was also used in feedback loop [7]. For a review on machine learning methods for disruption prediction the reader is referred to [8]. The main drawback of this first generation of predictors resided in their requirements of examples for the training.…”
Section: When the Loss Of Stability Is Fatal For Complex Systems: Dis...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three were indeed installed in JET tokamak real time network and one, called APODIS, was also used in feedback loop [7]. For a review on machine learning methods for disruption prediction the reader is referred to [8]. The main drawback of this first generation of predictors resided in their requirements of examples for the training.…”
Section: When the Loss Of Stability Is Fatal For Complex Systems: Dis...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In terms of artificial intelligence technologies, practically all the main machine learning threads have been tried to predict disruptions: artificial neural networks, support vector machines, fuzzy logic, generative topographic mapping, deep learning and even reinforcement learning [17]. With regard to real-time signal processing, the methods implemented have explored practically all known data analysis techniques for time series in the time domain, in the frequency domain, and in the combined time/frequency domains [18,19].…”
Section: A Data-driven Physics-based Approach To Prediction For Proxi...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since more than a decade, as a consequence of the lack of full disruption models from first principles [1,2], the recognition of disruptive events has been carried out by means of machine learning techniques [3]. Typically, supervised classification methods based on two classes of examples (disruptive and non-disruptive) have been developed.…”
Section: Prediction For Mitigation When Missing Important Diagnostic ...mentioning
confidence: 99%