Disruption prediction investigations using Machine Learning tools on DIII-D and Alcator C-Mod
Abstract
Using data-driven methodology, we exploit the time series of relevant plasma parameters for a large set of disrupted and non-disrupted discharges to develop a classification algorithm for detecting disruptive phases in shots that eventually disrupt. Comparing the same methodology on different devices is crucial in order to have information on the portability of the developed algorithm and the possible extrapolation to ITER. Therefore, we use data from two very different tokamaks, DIII-D and Alcator C-Mod. We then focus on a subset of disruption predictors, most of which are dimensionless and/or machine-independent parameters, coming from both plasma diagnostics and equilibrium reconstructions, such as the normalized plasma internal inductance ℓ and the n = 1 mode amplitude normalized to the toroidal magnetic field. Using such dimensionless indicators facilitates a more direct comparison between DIII-D and C-Mod. We then choose a shallow Machine Learning technique, called Random Forests, to explore the databases available for the two devices. We show results from the classification task, where we introduce a time dependency through the definition of class labels on the basis of the elapsed time before the disruption (i.e. ‘far from a disruption’ and ‘close to a disruption’). The performances of the different Random Forestmore »
- Authors:
-
- Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States). Plasma Science and Fusion Center (PSFC)
- General Atomics, San Diego, CA (United States)
- Columbia Univ., New York, NY (United States)
- Publication Date:
- Research Org.:
- Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States)
- Sponsoring Org.:
- USDOE Office of Science (SC), Fusion Energy Sciences (FES)
- OSTI Identifier:
- 1454268
- Grant/Contract Number:
- FC02-04ER54698; SC0014264; FG02-04ER54761
- Resource Type:
- Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Name:
- Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion
- Additional Journal Information:
- Journal Volume: 60; Journal Issue: 8; Journal ID: ISSN 0741-3335
- Publisher:
- IOP Science
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
- Subject:
- 70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY; 43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS; cross-device study; machine learning; disruptions
Citation Formats
Rea, C., Granetz, R. S., Montes, K., Tinguely, R. A., Eidietis, N., Hanson, J. M., and Sammuli, B.. Disruption prediction investigations using Machine Learning tools on DIII-D and Alcator C-Mod. United States: N. p., 2018.
Web. doi:10.1088/1361-6587/aac7fe.
Rea, C., Granetz, R. S., Montes, K., Tinguely, R. A., Eidietis, N., Hanson, J. M., & Sammuli, B.. Disruption prediction investigations using Machine Learning tools on DIII-D and Alcator C-Mod. United States. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6587/aac7fe
Rea, C., Granetz, R. S., Montes, K., Tinguely, R. A., Eidietis, N., Hanson, J. M., and Sammuli, B.. Mon .
"Disruption prediction investigations using Machine Learning tools on DIII-D and Alcator C-Mod". United States. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6587/aac7fe. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1454268.
@article{osti_1454268,
title = {Disruption prediction investigations using Machine Learning tools on DIII-D and Alcator C-Mod},
author = {Rea, C. and Granetz, R. S. and Montes, K. and Tinguely, R. A. and Eidietis, N. and Hanson, J. M. and Sammuli, B.},
abstractNote = {Using data-driven methodology, we exploit the time series of relevant plasma parameters for a large set of disrupted and non-disrupted discharges to develop a classification algorithm for detecting disruptive phases in shots that eventually disrupt. Comparing the same methodology on different devices is crucial in order to have information on the portability of the developed algorithm and the possible extrapolation to ITER. Therefore, we use data from two very different tokamaks, DIII-D and Alcator C-Mod. We then focus on a subset of disruption predictors, most of which are dimensionless and/or machine-independent parameters, coming from both plasma diagnostics and equilibrium reconstructions, such as the normalized plasma internal inductance ℓ and the n = 1 mode amplitude normalized to the toroidal magnetic field. Using such dimensionless indicators facilitates a more direct comparison between DIII-D and C-Mod. We then choose a shallow Machine Learning technique, called Random Forests, to explore the databases available for the two devices. We show results from the classification task, where we introduce a time dependency through the definition of class labels on the basis of the elapsed time before the disruption (i.e. ‘far from a disruption’ and ‘close to a disruption’). The performances of the different Random Forest classifiers are discussed in terms of several metrics, by showing the number of successfully detected samples, as well as the misclassifications. The overall model accuracies are above 97% when identifying a ‘far from disruption’ and a ‘disruptive’ phase for disrupted discharges. Nevertheless, the Forests are intrinsically different in their capability of predicting a disruptive behavior, with C-Mod predictions comparable to random guesses. Indeed, we show that C-Mod recall index, i.e. the sensitivity to a disruptive behavior, is as low as 0.47, while DIII-D recall is ~0.72. The portability of the developed algorithm is also tested across the two devices, by using DIII-D data for training the forests and C-Mod for testing and vice versa.},
doi = {10.1088/1361-6587/aac7fe},
journal = {Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion},
number = 8,
volume = 60,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {6}
}
Web of Science
Figures / Tables:

Works referenced in this record:
Integrated modeling applications for tokamak experiments with OMFIT
journal, July 2015
- Meneghini, O.; Smith, S. P.; Lao, L. L.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 55, Issue 8
Reconstruction of current profile parameters and plasma shapes in tokamaks
journal, November 1985
- Lao, L. L.; St. John, H.; Stambaugh, R. D.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 25, Issue 11
Advances in lower hybrid current drive technology on Alcator C-Mod
journal, June 2013
- Wallace, G. M.; Shiraiwa, S.; Hillairet, J.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 53, Issue 7
Survey of disruption causes at JET
journal, April 2011
- de Vries, P. C.; Johnson, M. F.; Alper, B.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 51, Issue 5
Statistical analysis of m / n = 2/1 locked and quasi-stationary modes with rotating precursors at DIII-D
journal, November 2016
- Sweeney, R.; Choi, W.; La Haye, R. J.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 57, Issue 1
Real time equilibrium reconstruction for tokamak discharge control
journal, July 1998
- Ferron, J. R.; Walker, M. L.; Lao, L. L.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 38, Issue 7
A reduced resistive wall mode kinetic stability model for disruption forecasting
journal, May 2017
- Berkery, J. W.; Sabbagh, S. A.; Bell, R. E.
- Physics of Plasmas, Vol. 24, Issue 5
Disruption forecasting at JET using neural networks
journal, December 2003
- Cannas, B.; Fanni, A.; Marongiu, E.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 44, Issue 1
Achievement of Sustained Net Plasma Heating in a Fusion Experiment with the Optometrist Algorithm
journal, July 2017
- Baltz, E. A.; Trask, E.; Binderbauer, M.
- Scientific Reports, Vol. 7, Issue 1
Chapter 3: MHD stability, operational limits and disruptions
journal, December 1999
- Mhd, ITER Physics Expert Group on Disrup; Editors, ITER Physics Basis
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 39, Issue 12
Support vector machines for disruption prediction and novelty detection at JET
journal, October 2007
- Cannas, B.; Delogu, R. S.; Fanni, A.
- Fusion Engineering and Design, Vol. 82, Issue 5-14
Magnetic diagnostic system of the DIII-D tokamak
journal, February 2006
- Strait, E. J.
- Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 77, Issue 2
Critical error fields for locked mode instability in tokamaks
journal, March 1992
- La Haye, R. J.; Fitzpatrick, R.; Hender, T. C.
- Physics of Fluids B: Plasma Physics, Vol. 4, Issue 7
Forecast of TEXT plasma disruptions using soft X rays as input signal in a neural network
journal, February 1999
- Vannucci, A.; Oliveira, K. A.; Tajima, T.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 39, Issue 2
Neural-net disruption predictor in JT-60U
journal, December 2003
- Yoshino, R.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 43, Issue 12
Nonaxisymmetric field effects on Alcator C-Mod
journal, May 2005
- Wolfe, S. M.; Hutchinson, I. H.; Granetz, R. S.
- Physics of Plasmas, Vol. 12, Issue 5
Exploratory Machine Learning Studies for Disruption Prediction Using Large Databases on DIII-D
journal, February 2018
- Rea, Cristina; Granetz, Robert S.
- Fusion Science and Technology, Vol. 74, Issue 1-2
Results of the JET real-time disruption predictor in the ITER-like wall campaigns
journal, October 2013
- Vega, Jesús; Dormido-Canto, Sebastián; López, Juan M.
- Fusion Engineering and Design, Vol. 88, Issue 6-8
On-line prediction and mitigation of disruptions in ASDEX Upgrade
journal, January 2002
- Pautasso, G.; Tichmann, C.; Egorov, S.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 42, Issue 1
A prediction tool for real-time application in the disruption protection system at JET
journal, October 2007
- Cannas, B.; Fanni, A.; Sonato, P.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 47, Issue 11
A review of feature selection techniques in bioinformatics
journal, August 2007
- Saeys, Y.; Inza, I.; Larranaga, P.
- Bioinformatics, Vol. 23, Issue 19
TokSearch: A search engine for fusion experimental data
journal, April 2018
- Sammuli, B. S.; Barr, J. L.; Eidietis, N. W.
- Fusion Engineering and Design, Vol. 129
Automatic disruption classification at JET: comparison of different pattern recognition techniques
journal, May 2006
- Cannas, B.; Cau, F.; Fanni, A.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 46, Issue 7
A cross-tokamak neural network disruption predictor for the JET and ASDEX Upgrade tokamaks
journal, April 2005
- Windsor, C. G.; Pautasso, G.; Tichmann, C.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 45, Issue 5
Considerations on energy confinement time scalings using present tokamak databases and prediction for ITER size experiments
journal, May 2000
- Sauter, O.; Martin, Y.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 40, Issue 5
Tokamak disruption alarm based on a neural network model of the high- beta limit
journal, June 1997
- Wroblewski, D.; Jahns, G. L.; Leuer, J. A.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 37, Issue 6
Neural network prediction of some classes of tokamak disruptions
journal, August 1996
- Hernandez, J. V.; Vannucci, A.; Tajima, T.
- Nuclear Fusion, Vol. 36, Issue 8
The MDSplus data acquisition system, current status and future directions
journal, January 1999
- Stillerman, Joshua; Fredian, Thomas W.
- Fusion Engineering and Design, Vol. 43, Issue 3-4
Neoclassical tearing modes
journal, December 2000
- Buttery, R. J.; Günter, S.; Giruzzi, G.
- Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, Vol. 42, Issue 12B
Selecting and interpreting measures of thematic classification accuracy
journal, October 1997
- Stehman, Stephen V.
- Remote Sensing of Environment, Vol. 62, Issue 1
Advanced tokamak research in DIII-D
journal, November 2004
- Greenfield, C. M.; Murakami, M.; Ferron, J. R.
- Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, Vol. 46, Issue 12B
miRNALoc: predicting miRNA subcellular localizations based on principal component scores of physico-chemical properties and pseudo compositions of di-nucleotides
journal, September 2020
- Meher, Prabina Kumar; Satpathy, Subhrajit; Rao, Atmakuri Ramakrishna
- Scientific Reports, Vol. 10, Issue 1
Statistical analysis of $m/n$ = 2/1 locked and quasi-stationary modes with rotating precursors at DIII-D
text, January 2016
- Sweeney, R.; Choi, W.; La Haye, R. J.
- arXiv
Works referencing / citing this record:
Machine learning control for disruption and tearing mode avoidance
journal, February 2020
- Fu, Yichen; Eldon, David; Erickson, Keith
- Physics of Plasmas, Vol. 27, Issue 2
Figures / Tables found in this record: