Export citation and abstract BibTeX RIS
There is an error in the EP β values included in the summary table 3 of section 'Conclusions and discussion'. Table 3 indicates the EP β threshold to destabilize different n = 1 to four AEs families (BAE, TAE and EAE) in the ITER-like inductive scenario and the off-axis case. The values of the EP β are wrongly multiplied by a factor 10. Now, the EP β values are correct and are shown in %. That way, table 3 is consistent with the data shown in figures 9 and 12.
Table 3. EP β threshold (%) in the ITER-like inductive scenario and the on-axis case for the different AE families (fixed Tf,max = 280 keV).
| Mode (n) | Inst. | βf (off-axis) (%) | βf (on-axis) (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BAE | Stable | Stable |
| 2 | BAE | 2.5 | 5 |
| 3 | BAE | 2.5 | 5 |
| 4 | BAE | 2.5 | Stable |
| 1 | TAE | 5 | Stable |
| 2 | TAE | 2.5 | 5 |
| 3 | TAE | 5 | Stable |
| 4 | TAE | 1 | 5 |
| 1 | EAE | 5 | Stable |
| 2 | EAE | 2.5 | Stable |
| 3 | EAE | 2.5 | 5 |
| 4 | EAE | Stable | Stable |
Acknowledgments
The authors want to thank QST Naka technical staff for their contributions in the study of JT-60SA operation scenarios. The authors also wish to acknowledge N. Aiba for fruitful discussion. This work is supported in part by NIFS under contract NIFS07KLPH004.