You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| 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 | |
| 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. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Argentina | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 33% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 27% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 3% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Physics and Astronomy | 18 | 55% |
| Energy | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 30% |
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
#848,109
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Physical Review Letters
#2,704
of 35,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,649
of 336,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physical Review Letters
#78
of 595 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 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 35,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. 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 336,877 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 595 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.