4.5 Article

Inferring morphology and strength of magnetic fields from proton radiographs

期刊

REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS
卷 88, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/1.5013029

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [B523820]
  2. Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, Office of Science, U.S. DOE [DE-AC02-06CH11357]
  3. Office of Fusion Energy Sciences, Office of Science, U.S. DOE [DE-SC0016566]
  4. U.S. DOE NNSA ASC through the Argonne Institute for Computing in Science [57789]
  5. U.S. National Science Foundation [PHY-0903997, PHY-1619573]
  6. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  7. Division Of Physics [1619573] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Proton radiography is an important diagnostic method for laser plasma experiments and is particularly important in the analysis of magnetized plasmas. The theory of radiographic image analysis has heretofore only permitted somewhat limited analysis of the radiographs of such plasmas. We furnish here a theory that remedies this deficiency. We show that to linear order in magnetic field gradients, proton radiographs are projection images of the MHD current along the proton trajectories. We demonstrate that in the linear regime (i.e., the small image contrast regime), the full structure of the projected perpendicular magnetic field can be reconstructed by solving a steady-state inhomogeneous 2-dimensional diffusion equation sourced by the radiograph fluence contrast data. We explore the validity of the scheme with increasing image contrast, as well as limitations of the inversion method due to the Poisson noise, discretization errors, radiograph edge effects, and obstruction by laser target structures. We also provide a separate analysis that is suited to the inference of isotropic-homogeneous magnetic turbulence spectra. Finally, we discuss extension of these results to the nonlinear regime (i.e., the order unity image contrast regime). Published by AIP Publishing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据