Dataset Viewer
Auto-converted to Parquet Duplicate
id
string
material
string
reactor_class
string
shot_id
string
avg_edge_heat_flux_mw_m2
float64
peak_heat_flux_mw_m2
float64
edge_temp_eV
int64
particle_flux_1e22_m2s
float64
surface_temp_c
int64
erosion_rate_um_hr
float64
crack_density_cm2
int64
thermal_cycle_count
int64
baseline_coherence_score
float64
decoupling_flag
int64
notes
string
PFCB-001
W
Tokamak
TS-1001
6.5
10.2
85
1.8
820
0.9
12
40
0.93
0
Stable coupling
PFCB-002
W
Tokamak
TS-1002
7.1
11
90
2
860
1.1
15
55
0.91
0
Normal erosion vs flux
PFCB-003
W
Tokamak
TS-1003
7.8
12.5
95
2.3
910
1.5
20
70
0.89
0
Expected fatigue rise
PFCB-004
W
Tokamak
TS-1004
8.4
13.6
100
2.6
960
1.9
27
85
0.86
0
Coherent thermal cycling
PFCB-005
W
Tokamak
TS-1005
9.2
14.8
105
2.9
1,010
2.6
41
95
0.78
1
Erosion rising faster than baseline
PFCB-006
Be
Tokamak
TS-2001
5.8
9.4
78
1.6
740
1.4
10
35
0.92
0
Be baseline stable
PFCB-007
Be
Tokamak
TS-2002
6.6
10.1
82
1.9
780
1.9
14
50
0.88
0
Expected response
PFCB-008
Be
Tokamak
TS-2003
7.3
11.2
88
2.2
835
2.7
22
65
0.8
1
Onset of mismatch
PFCB-009
W
Stellarator
ST-3001
6.9
10.8
92
2.1
875
1.2
16
60
0.9
0
Stellarator stable
PFCB-010
W
Stellarator
ST-3002
8.6
13.9
101
2.7
980
2.2
33
88
0.83
1
Decoupling emerging

Dataset goal

Learn the baseline coherent coupling between:

edge plasma heat flux

surface temperature

erosion / sublimation rate

bulk thermal fatigue cracking

This is the baseline layer for predicting PFC failure.

Required model outputs

coherence_score

decoupling_flag

Why it matters

PFC failure starts when:

heat flux stops predicting erosion rate

erosion stops predicting crack density growth

thermal cycles stop matching observed damage

This dataset establishes the normal coupling surface.

Use cases

tungsten and beryllium PFC monitoring

early warning for wall lifetime loss

fusion materials screening

maintenance planning

Downloads last month
10