| Literature DB >> 35962017 |
Iu V Kochetkov1, N D Bukharskii1, M Ehret2,3, Y Abe4,5, K F F Law4, V Ospina-Bohorquez6, J J Santos2, S Fujioka4, G Schaumann3, B Zielbauer7, A Kuznetsov1, Ph Korneev8,9.
Abstract
Optical generation of kilo-tesla scale magnetic fields enables prospective technologies and fundamental studies with unprecedentedly high magnetic field energy density. A question is the optimal configuration of proposed setups, where plenty of physical phenomena accompany the generation and complicate both theoretical studies and experimental realizations. Short laser drivers seem more suitable in many applications, though the process is tangled by an intrinsic transient nature. In this work, an artificial neural network is engaged for unravelling main features of the magnetic field excited with a picosecond laser pulse. The trained neural network acquires an ability to read the magnetic field values from experimental data, extremely facilitating interpretation of the experimental results. The conclusion is that the short sub-picosecond laser pulse may generate a quasi-stationary magnetic field structure living on a hundred picosecond time scale, when the induced current forms a closed circuit.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35962017 PMCID: PMC9374746 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-17202-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1The target sketch (a) and the magnified photographic image (b). Scheme of the setup used in Shot #18 (c) and #22 (d). Proton radiography image obtained in Shot #18 in the second layer of RCF stack, corresponding to Bragg peak position for MeV protons, passing the studied region ps after the end of the laser pulse; darker colors correspond to higher proton concentrations (e). The same for Shot #22 (f).
Figure 2Sketch of the experimental setup for magnetic field generation and proton radiography measurements with two laser beams—SP1 and SP2.
Figure 3Architecture of the developed CNN (a) and learning curves for training and validation data sets, obtained in training run #1 and displaying the decrease of the mean squared error with the number of epoch (b). Panels (c1) and (d1) provide a comparison of proton patterns obtained in the experiment and in simulation for the field parameters extracted in training run #1. Corresponding ’void’ contours used for assessment of the fields are shown in panels (c2, c3, d2); for the experimental image two different possible contours are shown, (c2) corresponds to the parameters of the contour retrieval algorithm that intuitively provide a better fit of the ’void’ region boundary while (c3) corresponds to the parameters which match those that were used to retrieve the contours from all synthetic images. For easier comparison experimental contours are shown without inner fill and are imposed on the original experimental image.
Summary of the results obtained by the ANN in 10 training runs: root-mean-square errors and obtained using the synthetic data, and predicted values for the magnetic field at the coil center and the electric potential of the target , obtained by passing the real experimental image through the trained CNN.
| Run # | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 7.8 | 1.7 | 235.9 | 30.2 |
| 2 | 12.4 | 2.0 | 209.4 | 35.8 |
| 3 | 10.4 | 2.3 | 205.5 | 30.3 |
| 4 | 9.1 | 1.7 | 215.3 | 28.9 |
| 5 | 12.2 | 2.4 | 187.2 | 36.5 |
| 6 | 9.0 | 2.0 | 198.0 | 35.0 |
| 7 | 8.2 | 2.1 | 229.6 | 33.8 |
| 8 | 8.3 | 1.6 | 234.0 | 24.4 |
| 9 | 9.6 | 2.4 | 223.4 | 30.3 |
| 10 | 10.9 | 1.7 | 183.8 | 38.7 |
| Average | 9.8 | 2.0 | 212.2 | 32.4 |
| – | – | 17.8 | 4.1 |
Figure 4The peak value of cross-correlation between the normalised experimental and synthetic images as a function of the magnetic field in the target center and the electric potential of the target. The correlation peak values are normalized per maximum of the autocorrelation function . Black cross with error bars shows the best-fit for the region of the maximum cross-correlation peak value. Positions of the blue crosses show the ANN-retrieved results obtained by each of the 10 models that were fit and validated on different subsets of the data, while their size indicates retrieval errors estimated by testing the model on the validation subsets created from the artificially created data. Cyan cross shows the resulting CNN-based estimate obtained by taking the mean of 10 predictions made by the models trained on different training runs, see Table 1; its error bars correspond to the uncertainty which results from the spread of the predicted values and the contour retrieval error, with the size of the interval corresponding to the 95% confidence level.
Figure 5Results of 2D PIC simulations. Left panel: spatial distribution of magnetic field ps after the end of the laser pulse, averaged spatially with a Gaussian kernel of m to reduce visual noise. Right panel: time evolution of the magnetic field inside the ’snail’ cavity for two different scenarios of magnetic field generation, showing that the generated magnetic field evolves towards stationary distribution if the circuit is closed before the discharge reaches the end of the coil, which proposes a way of using short laser drivers with practically interesting large coils. Magnetic field is averaged over a m square, marked with the white dashed line on the spatial distribution plot.