Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,768 studies31 sourcesUpdated 38 min ago
PreprintarXiv licencearXiv

An In-depth Study of Stochastic Stellarator Coil Optimization

Abstract

We extend stochastic coil optimization for stellarators and analyze the effect of optimizing for coil manufacturing errors, assembly errors represented by centroid translations and angular offsets, and errors in the coil currents. We further analyze the impact of different perturbation methods and use them in conjunction with the Augmented Lagrangian algorithm. For three stellarators, we show that stochastic methods regularize the coil optimization landscape and improve robustness in every case, with the magnitude of the improvement varying substantially across different plasmas. Our metric for coil robustness, Q, is improved by 4.50% to 729% across different configurations. Lastly, we perform numerous hyperparameter scans, including e.g. scanning the training perturbation size and the out-of-sample (OOS) evaluation perturbation size and find coupled and de-coupled training tolerance gains ranging from $0.09$ mm to $1.35$ mm depending strongly on the particular stellarator.

Related

  1. A New Degree of Freedom in Stellarator Coil Design
    Sophia A. Henneberg, Annika Zettl
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textPlasma physicsarXiv
  2. Feasibility of a Flexible, Hybrid Tokamak-Stellarator Experiment using an Axisymmetric Dipole Coil Array
    Jacob Halpern, Mohammed Haque, Elizabeth Paul +6
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textPlasma physicsarXiv
  3. Controlling writhe in stellarator optimization
    Tobias M. Schuett, Sophia A. Henneberg
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-SA 4.0Full textPlasma physicsarXiv
  4. AI-Accelerated Gyrokinetic Predictions of Turbulent Transport for Stellarator Design Optimization and Experimental Planning
    R. Michael Churchill, Matt Landreman, Jong Youl Choi +10
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textPlasma physicsarXiv
  5. Efficient SPAD reconstruction framework with time-frequency domain compression and lightweight joint depth-intensity optimization
    Yaoqi Bao, Sijie Wu, Dong Li +4
    Optics ExpressPeer-reviewedPublisher termsApplied physics & instrumentationCrossref
BibTeX
@misc{gallegos2026indepth,
  title = {{An In-depth Study of Stochastic Stellarator Coil Optimization}},
  author = {Vincenzo Gallegos and Evan Laljit and Julianne Stratton and Gabe Perez-Giz and Alan Kaptanoglu},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.33374},
  eprint = {2610.33374},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.33374},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - An In-depth Study of Stochastic Stellarator Coil Optimization
AU  - Vincenzo Gallegos
AU  - Evan Laljit
AU  - Julianne Stratton
AU  - Gabe Perez-Giz
AU  - Alan Kaptanoglu
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/24
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.33374
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.33374
AB  - We extend stochastic coil optimization for stellarators and analyze the effect of optimizing for coil manufacturing errors, assembly errors represented by centroid translations and angular offsets, and errors in the coil currents. We further analyze the impact of different perturbation methods and use them in conjunction with the Augmented Lagrangian algorithm. For three stellarators, we show that stochastic methods regularize the coil optimization landscape and improve robustness in every case, with the magnitude of the improvement varying substantially across different plasmas. Our metric for coil robustness, Q, is improved by 4.50% to 729% across different configurations. Lastly, we perform numerous hyperparameter scans, including e.g. scanning the training perturbation size and the out-of-sample (OOS) evaluation perturbation size and find coupled and de-coupled training tolerance gains ranging from $0.09$ mm to $1.35$ mm depending strongly on the particular stellarator.
ER  -