It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Laser wakefield accelerators promise to revolutionize many areas of accelerator science. However, one of the greatest challenges to their widespread adoption is the difficulty in control and optimization of the accelerator outputs due to coupling between input parameters and the dynamic evolution of the accelerating structure. Here, we use machine learning techniques to automate a 100 MeV-scale accelerator, which optimized its outputs by simultaneously varying up to six parameters including the spectral and spatial phase of the laser and the plasma density and length. Most notably, the model built by the algorithm enabled optimization of the laser evolution that might otherwise have been missed in single-variable scans. Subtle tuning of the laser pulse shape caused an 80% increase in electron beam charge, despite the pulse length changing by just 1%.
Laser wakefield accelerators are compact sources of ultra-relativistic electrons which are highly sensitive to many control parameters. Here the authors present an automated machine learning based method for the efficient multi-dimensional optimization of these plasma-based particle accelerators.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
















1 Imperial College London, The John Adams Institute for Accelerator Science, London, UK (GRID:grid.7445.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2113 8111)
2 STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Central Laser Facility, Didcot, UK (GRID:grid.76978.37) (ISNI:0000 0001 2296 6998)
3 York Plasma Institute, University of York, Department of Physics, York, UK (GRID:grid.5685.e) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9668)
4 University of Michigan, Center for Ultrafast Optical Science, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370)
5 STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Central Laser Facility, Didcot, UK (GRID:grid.76978.37) (ISNI:0000 0001 2296 6998); York Plasma Institute, University of York, Department of Physics, York, UK (GRID:grid.5685.e) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9668)
6 University of Oxford, Clarendon Laboratory, Oxford, UK (GRID:grid.4991.5) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8948)
7 University of Michigan, Department of Chemical Engineering, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370)
8 University of Michigan, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Ann Arbor, USA (GRID:grid.214458.e) (ISNI:0000000086837370)
9 Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, Hamburg, Germany (GRID:grid.7683.a) (ISNI:0000 0004 0492 0453)