National Institute for Fusion Science (NIFS)
National Institutes of Natural Sciences (NINS)

Peer Review Reports in FY2010

March, 2011

NIFS Administrative Council External Peer Review Committee

Contents

Chapter 1

Background ･････････････････････････････････････････････ 1

Chapter 2 Summary of Each Section ･･････････････････････････････ 5
2.1

Domestic collaboration research ････････････････････････････ 5

2.2

International collaboration research ････････････････････････ 28

2.3

Joint research ････････････････････････････････････････････ 38

Chapter 3

Recommendation ･･････････････････････････････････････ 43

3.1

Summary ･････････････････････････････････････････････････ 43

3.2

Proposal ･････････････････････････････････････････････････ 48

Chapter 4

In closing ･････････････････････････････････････････････ 49

Reference

Terminology ･･････････････････････････････････････････ 51

Chapter 1 Background
National Institute for Fusion Science (NIFS) has promoted joint research and joint use of
facilities on a national level since 2004, when it became a member of National Institutes of
Natural Sciences (NINS), an inter-university research institute corporation. An
inter-university research institute is defined as the “organization that brings together related
researchers from national, public and private universities throughout Japan, and carry out
joint research as well as joint use of the most advanced facilities and information” and also
the “organization that promotes cutting-edge researches while encouraging its researchers
to share the experimental or observatory devices that an individual university cannot
afford”. Plasma and fusion research is one of those effectively taking advantage of thisunique concept, and made a significant progress over the past half century, particularly in a
way that such large-scale equipment that a university cannot have is shared through joint
researches – an unprecedented and unique system which is unseen in the rest of the world.
At incorporating, inter-university research institutes are required to make a mid-term plan
every six years, and implementation of the plan is subject to annual evaluation, whichusually targets an administrative performance. However, NIFS considers its scientificperformance should be also exposed to external reviewing, and established the ExternalPeer Review Committee under its Administrative Council. The NIFS Administrative
Council External Peer Review Committee is constituted by non-NIFS members of the
Administrative Council and expert personnel designated from the field related to the year’s
target. The target and items to be checked is annually determined by the Administrative
Council. Evaluation results are reported to the Administrative Council, who hands it to
NIFS, so that it uses the evaluation results to improve performance for the following years.
Here a successive cycle of Plan-Do-Check-Act is given to NIFS’s research operation. It isreasonable to see such efforts of the Administrative Council have been rewarded when ahigh overall rating was given to NIFS’s scientific performance of the first mid-term plan
period by National Institute for Academic Degree and University Evaluation.
During the second-midterm plan period NIFS is to improve joint use and joint researchbased on what it attained to during the last period. Meanwhile, in order to strengthen acentripetal role as a Center of Excellence (COE) in plasma and nuclear fusion research,
NIFS has begun to work by organizing three research projects of Large Helical Device(LHD), simulation and fusion engineering, and will integrate the outputs of these to ensure
nuclear fusion reactor.
-1-

To this end, NIFS had drastically reorganized its research section. A big change is theinauguration of Coordination Research Project. To vitalize collaborative activities is a
mission of an inter-university research institute, but activities vary in style and spread out
geographically. Domestically, there are joint researches coordinated on an inter-institutional
agreement and industrial-academic cooperation, along with the main framework ofDomestic Collaboration. Internationally, there are duties as an implementing agency forinter-governmental cooperation. There are inter-institutional collaborations between notableforeign organizations, ITER-related activity of International Tokamak Physics Activity, or
ITPA, and other voluntarily efforts. Previously, all these collaborative activities were fully
dependent on an individual contribution because NIFS did lack a system to grasp a whole
picture and allocate resources. That is why the Coordination Research Project is established.
It is expected the Project will undertake the work and provide an organizational support tothe activities.
On launching the Project, the Administrative Council decided to give an external view to
NIFS’s collaboration/coordination activities. The extensively-spread activities need to bereviewed in order to determine a policy in supporting them. The Administrative Council
formed NIFS Administrative Council External Peer Review Committee with its nine
non-NIFS members as well as four foreign peers, and at the same time established a
specialist team of subcommittees with them, inviting other four members in relevant fields.
The committee members first gathered on October 21, 2010, when they discussed thisyear’s evaluation, and made a conclusion on details including what to be checked (seebelow). At their second meeting, followed by the first meeting of the subcommittees(December 11, 2010), relevant information on activities and results was provided by NIFS
using viewgraphs and annual reports (see the references), and then questions were asked
and answered. The subcommittee members met on January 27 2011, asked further questions
to NIFS and made their own evaluation. After sum-ups were submitted by eachsubcommittee team, the External Peer Review Committee integrated them and finalized theevaluation at its third meeting (February 23 2011). The attached document No. 3 shows theschedules of the year’s evaluation.
This report consists of four chapters – Background (Chapter 1), Summary of Each Section(Chapter 2), Recommendations (Chapter 3) and In Closing (Chapter 4). After being
approved by the Administrative Council, the report is going to be submitted by NIFS
Director-General to NINS President. Then it will go through NINS sections of Education
and Research Council as well as Administrative Council, and then will be a supplementary
document for NINS report FY2010, which is to be submitted to Ministry of Education,-2-

Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.
The report is to be released both in print and online.
This year’s evaluation perspectives are as follows:[Domestic collaboration research](1)
Performances and products after NIFS was reorganized as inter-university research
institute in FY2004
 Are the application categories properly up to date? [*] Has the collaboration research progressed based on the opinions of collaborations? [*] Have the results of collaboration research been published properly? [*] Has the collaboration research progressed based on evaluations over the previous results?
[*]
 Are the results of the collaboration research accumulated properly as an academic
resource? [*] Have the circumstances for collaboration been improved? [*] Has the collaboration research helped educating students and young researchers?
[*] Pointed out in the previous external peer reviewing.
(2)
Future direction
 Does the plan in each category suggest a direction based on a long-term vision? Are theysatisfactory as a plan of COE of fusion research?
 Does the collaboration research function as a pivot for advancing new studies, such as aprogram under the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research?
[International collaboration research](1)
International collaboration research based on inter-governmental agreements
 Has NIFS fulfilled its responsibility as an implementing agency?
 Are the policy and plan for future collaboration satisfactory?
(2)
International collaboration research based on inter-institutional agreements
 Does each program take advantage of characteristics of the agreed institutes?
 Is the strategy that includes ITER and BA appropriate?
(3)International collaboration research under the National institutes of Natural Science Is the program productive?
(4)
Voluntary contributions for other International collaboration programs (ITPA, etc.)
 Are the contributions satisfactory in terms of NIFS’s duty?

-3-

[Joint research](1)
Research cooperation within the National Institutes of Natural Science Is the cooperation productive?
(2)
Domestic research cooperation based on inter-institutional agreements
 Does each program take advantage of characteristics of the agreed institutes?
(3)
Industry-university cooperation
 Is the cooperation a productive spin-off of fusion research?
 Does it contribute to the local community and industries?

-4-Chapter 2 Summary of Each Section
Following the perspectives shown above, this chapter presents main points of remarks bysection given by the committee and subcommittee members. The figures in brackets show
how many reviewers refer to the same points. Comments by the foreign reviewers areshown with little adjustment.

(1)

Domestic collaboration research

1) Performances and products after NIFS were reorganized as inter-university research
institute in FY2004.
①Are the application categories properly up to date?
●

Based on advice by the previous External Peer Review Committee, the categories are
determined by the Domestic Collaboration committee dominated by external personnel, so
the process is highly transparent. In order to contribute to a DEMO reactor, the BilateralCollaboration has welcomed university centers conducting engineering research, and is
now discussing topics to be handled jointly by several centers. In the LHD Project a new
category has been established in connection to deuterium experiment, which was requestedby the Fusion Network. This movement corresponds well to a scientific trend. Regarding
the General Collaboration categories were reviewed in respect for voices of the community.
Efforts have been made flexibly enough to fit scientific trend and academic progress. The
performance is appropriate and highly commended. (6)● Now that ITER has entered into a construction phase, Japan is to strengthen academic
infrastructure through inter-university affiliation; to support development of ITER and
DEMO; and to nurture scientists working there. National Institute for Fusion Science, or
NIFS, is expected to strongly promote basic research in an extensive area related to thecontrol of burning plasma. In this sense the approach of the three programs (General, LHD
Project and Bilateral) is appropriate. Lines are drawn properly between the three: 1) the
General Collaboration focuses on experiments using smaller devices and workshops
including ones merely to share information; 2) the LHD Project focuses on experiments
related to reactor engineering or fusion plasma such that can contribute to LHD
improvement; and 3) the Bilateral Collaboration focuses on experiments on
high-temperature plasma using medium-sized devices. Meanwhile, each program has acomplementary and multilayered relationship with another, so that one can help others with-5-

differentiated views. The Domestic Collaboration could be a model system for any
scientific activities using large devices. So it is highly commended. Those who are studying
the space, celestial objects or accelerators have a particular interest in the system of the
Bilateral Collaboration. (4)● For the Bilateral Collaboration, NIFS seems to be well aware of its responsibility not only
as a hub care taker but also as a leader to guide all the participants (the Centers). What is
highly commended in particular is that with the awareness, NIFS attempts to design a new
type of collaboration with the characteristic Centers, which is highly commended. (1)● Progress has been observed in the following activities of the Bilateral Collaboration:
Studies with University of Tsukuba on the effect of electric potential/field structure on thephysics of transport improvement and the development of Gyrotron; studies with Kyoto
University to enhance advances of helical magnetic field configuration with its highcontrollability; the advancement of Japan’s first steady-state spherical tokamak at Kyushu
University; and the development work with Osaka University on fast ignition technologies.
The performances are remarkable. The LHD Project and General Collaboration have also
been fruitful to LHD and ITER. The 2010 IAEA Fusion Energy Conference (FEC2010)highly approved their output, which probes the adequacy of the application categories. (1)● The categories have become more corresponding to the new structure of NIFS. It will takesome time to determine whether the selection is adequate, but it seems to become more
project-oriented. Although it is not clear whether academic progress is reflected well,
NIFS’s attempt to promote collaborations in reactor designing and engineering iscommendable now that demand for a low-carbon society increases and ITER construction
is in full operation. (1)● It seems that the selection of categories follow academic progress properly, and isbasically highly commended. The second mid-term plan stresses the promotion ofcooperation in fusion engineering with a view to a helical demo reactor. In order to makethe plan more effective and more efficient, here I propose following ideas:①

Categorize tasks into closed-tasks, tasks in common with tokamak, and tasks to besolved by helical alone, and work harder on the latter two in the Domestic Collaboration.

②

Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) is working for the development of solid-breeder
blanket while NIFS and universities are working for advanced blanket. Although work isclearly divided, NIFS is expected to lead universities to make academic progress as wellas to take part in ITER’s project of Test Blanket Module. (1)● The Bilateral Collaboration handles many subjects that can be shared by the six Centers,
so new ideas should be given to the program. For example, a new subject to prompt ties
between Centers’ can be created like comparison analysis of their devices in a closer
relation or a study that requires the use of devices of more than two Centers. They will
increase the program’s usefulness and significance. The General Collaboration sustains the-6-foot of fusion research, and at the same time enables researchers in different area tocommunicate through the program. As it does, I expect NIFS to continuously handle a wide
range of basic sciences and broad the horizon of fusion research. (1)● The categories are basically highly commended. But those of the General Collaborationneed further prioritization according to the recent budgetary situation. Expansion of thecategory is desirable but consideration is necessary to determine what to be emphasized
due to financial limitation. (1)● Bilateral Collaboration: In FY2010, two more large-scale research centers are added tothe initial four research center. This expansion made more possibilities of collaboration area,
so it resulted in 20 more accepted programs with respected to FY2009. However, thebudget limitation in FY2010 collaboration overall, made funding limitation issues that to beresolved.
LHD Project Collaboration: In this category, two major fields of research, such as“Fusion Engineering Research” and “Fusion Science Research” are maintained.
General Collaboration: In FY2009, categories of proposal had been increased to 31 frominitial FY2004 of 24, including sub-categories. This change is deemed to be reflecting
progress of many fields of research interests.
Therefore, the Domestic Collaboration Program of NIFS is rated very highly by its
well-balanced mix of research areas by properly managed and updated categories.
● There is no doubt that application categories are properly chosen.,because they are up todate with current trends of fusion development.
Moreover, NIFS activities are at the cutting edge of the international fusion research.
Hence, all of the involved partners ranging from world famous scientific centers anduniversities to small groups in less renown universities from all over Japan benefit greatly
from the collaborations managed by NIFS.
Indeed, the partners focused on narrow specialized areas of research are provided withthe guidance and the coherence needed to achieve the important goal of thermonuclear
fusion.
At the same time, they maintain their excellence in their field of expertise.
Therefore, the system outlined long back in 2004 has proven to be a powerfulmechanism to streamline and coordinate fusion research in Japan.
The model is now widely recognized and used in different parts of the world.
It seems that this is the only way to organize a broad interdisciplinary program which
requires the synergy of many fields of science focused on a very important goal.
Therefore, the goal of achieving nuclear fusion vital for the future energy supply has
been transformed into the “real target” due to the progress made by the international effort
during the period of 2004 – 2010.
● The Domestic Collaborations are divided into three types: Bilateral Collaborations, LHD-7-

Project Collaborations, and General Collaborations. The total number of Domestic
Collaborations has increased steadily since 2004, reaching ~450 in 2009, with much of theincrease occurring in the category of Large Scale Computer Simulations.
Some changes have occurred in the application categories for the three types ofDomestic Collaborations:①
Bilateral Collaborations - During the first mid-term period 2004-2009, NIFS
carried out Bilateral Collaborations with four institutions (Kyushu, Osaka, Kyoto, andTsukuba), with the number of collaboration activities roughly doubling during this period.
In 2010, two new Bilateral Collaboration partners (Tohoku and Toyama) were added, toextend the Bilateral Collaboration program into the area of fusion engineering. Thisextension is appropriate is view of the emphasis on fusion engineering as a crosscutting
Research Project of NIFS in the revised organizational structure of the Institute.
②

LHD Project Collaborations - Apparently there were no changes in the application
categories for this type of Domestic Collaborations. Also, the total number of activities
remained unchanged.

③

General Collaborations - The biggest changes in application categories occurredhere.
Two new categories were added: DD Experiments Planning (with four collaboration
activities) and Fusion Archives (with eight activities). The change is appropriate because
NIFS will soon receive final approval for its planned DD experimental campaign andbecause there is a need to accumulate historical records while the older generation ofpioneering scientists in the fusion field are still available.
The subcategories within the category of LHD Project General Collaborations weresignificantly re-organized. The total number of activities in the LHD Project General
Collaboration category was unchanged from 2004 to 2009, but these activities are now
spread over the twice the number of subcategories (five in 2004, nine in 2009). Thischange is appropriate in order to facilitate correspondence to the revised organizational
structure of the Department of Helical Research in NIFS.
Several application categories, although unchanged as categories per se, experienced
noticeable changes in their respective numbers of activities: e.g., Large Scale Computer
Simulations (15  59) and Workshops (16  24) increased, while CHS/CHS Data
Analysis (12  4) and Basic Plasma (23  13) decreased.
Here are a few other comments:
The list of categories for General Collaborations has major categories called “LHD
Project” and “Fusion Engineering,” which correspond to two of the three crosscutting
Research Projects of NIFS. It might be helpful to organize the several theory-related
categories in the list as subcategories of one major category that would correspond to thethird Research Project, namely, Numerical Experiments.
-8-

In the list of categories for General Collaborations, it is not clear how the “LHD Theory”
subcategory differs from the “LHD Numerical Analysis System” category.
It might be helpful to change the name of the “Coordinate Research” category, in order to distinguish
this from the Coordinated Research Collaborations. A similar comment applies to the “LHD Project”
category of General Collaborations, in order to distinguish this from the LHD Project Collaborations.

Since Bilateral Collaborations are defined on the basis of the use of large facilities atuniversity research centers (such as Osaka, Kyoto, etc.), it is not clear why BilateralCollaboration with NIFS itself has existed since 2007 [cf. page 26 of the second
presentation].
● In domestic collaboration, NIFS distinguishes between three so-called “frameworks”:①②③

Bilateral collaboration
Collaboration with LHD
General collaboration
Such a distinction makes sense. There is some overlap between framework 2 and 3, but
the work under framework 2 is meant to be more long-term and seems to contributedirectly to scientific methods used on LHD. Framework 1 is exclusively devoted to support
larger facilities in four universities (Kyushu, Osaka, Kyoto, Tsukuba) and to connect theiractivities to the research done on LHD.
After 2004, the number of collaboration proposals has increased. This is mainly due toincrease in “bilateral collaboration” and “large-scale computer simulation”. The vast
majority of proposals is made in the framework 3 “general collaboration”. Here one has avery large variety of collaboration categories with a quite disperse number of proposals. It
is remarkable that almost all proposals are accepted. It is reasoned that this is due to thebeneficial role of a “caretaker”, who accompanies the proposal process, and due to a
conscious promotion of innovative ideas.
My recommendation is to make sure that the quality of the general collaboration
proposals is similar for all categories. It is usually a good sign if there is a certain rejection
rate. NIFS may consider to adjust the schemes to have more competition and thereby tofoster collaboration with the best and most innovative ideas proposed. This is especially
important if the budget for collaboration further decreases.

②Has the collaboration research progressed based on the opinions of collaborators?
●

A project of QUEST, a spherical tokamak device owned by Kyushu University, waspromoted with the involvement of external personnel in application screening and project
operating from the beginning of the first mid-term period. Such a system was introduced by
all the Centers before the term ended. The Centers adequately exchange views with
relevant communities like the Japan Society of Plasma Science and the Nuclear Fusion-9-Research group by holding symposiums and other meetings. Likewise, the LHD Project
and the Domestic Collaboration respect external opinions. The screening process of the
LHD Project is undertaken by the Fusion Network Committee, and in the General
Collaboration caretakers are constantly in a close contact with participants. Besides, theDomestic Collaboration committee consists largely of non-NIFS members. Considering
these factors, the collaboration programs are well connected with the community andadequately operated responding to opinions of collaborators, which is highly commended.
(9)● The cooperative use of diagnostic devices, which started in 2010, is a result of NIFS’s
eagerness to meet the community’s needs. It is a reasonable and useful system in terms ofeffective use of assets within the community. It is highly commended. (3)● It is extremely highly appraised that NIFS has been listening to the fusion community so
as to develop the General Collaboration, activate joint use and joint research of the LHD
Project and the Bilateral Collaboration, and to launch bilaterally-interactive collaborations
and network-type collaborations. In order to make the joint systems even more effective,
attention should be paid to on-the-spot voices of universities through the Fusion Networkand other channels. (1)● Responding to the community’s demand, NIFS has launched joint work in fusion
engineering. It also has prepared a new team of researchers within the institute, has secured
budget, and has increased participants. It suggests NIFS fulfills its responsibility as aninter-university research institute, which is extremely highly valued. (1)● Although there is often a confliction between the efforts to expand a program and to
maximize its performance, it is expected to increase the pool of human resources in alonger run for expanding the community. (1)● The advantage of the Bilateral Collaboration is that the lack of personnel on a certain
subject at a Center can be covered by other Centers. This is a highly commendable system.
Meanwhile, information about the Bilateral Collaboration has to be conveyed more to thecommunity. I expect that an informal meeting, which was highly valued by the ExternalPeer Review Committee years ago, would be continued as it is. (1)● Among the Centers, Kyoto University is highly commended for its effort toward open andfair operation of its Bilateral Collaboration activity. What is expected there is that it will be
more eager to take in the community’s opinions. It is expected to add that point to its
objectives. The University of Tsukuba is also rated high not only for its H-mode researchusing the mirror device but also for its attempt to shift it to divertor research, which takes
advantage of the end loss out of the H-mode study. Kyushu University is highly
commendable for its unprecedented attempt for steady-state operation at the sphericaltokamak QUEST using electron Bernstein waves, but it should expand its research theme
so as to help tokamak performance as a whole progress. (1)- 10 -

●

Many activities of the joint use and joint research are conducted in coordination with thefusion community, which are highly commended. Meanwhile, it seems necessary to know
to what extent NIFS or the community has been benefitting from the General Collaborationor the Joint Research. (1)● It is appreciated that major issues related to DEMO are set as a common target for theCenters, but it should be clear what makes the Bilateral Collaboration differ from the LHD
Project. Consideration is necessary in order to treat magnetic fusion and inertial
confinement fusion as one discipline. (1)● PR effort should be enhanced on middle or smaller workshops as well as lectures held
at/by NIFS. There is often a case that a collaborator is inspired to attend such events whileworking for the Domestic Collaboration. (1)● The selection and management of NIFS Domestic Collaboration is conducted by“Collaboration Committee” consisted by 44 Members, 25 from outside and 19 from NIFS.
Also, the “Collaboration Committee” is organized by three sub-committees for threeareas of Collaboration. The planning, selection and review processes has been developed tofit each categories of collaboration purpose and needs, with access to the “Fusion ResearchCommunity” through “Fusion Network (F-net)” for their feed-back.
Therefore, the management system of collaboration process is very well organized andbalanced, so that fair representation of collaborators’ opinion is founded in the system.
● The progress is visible in all aspects of these activities.
NIFS is adjusting and improving its governing role all the time.
It shows a great flexibility by introducing new forms of collaborations such as “ Fusion
Network “ bilateral collaborations and etc.
NIFS also reorganizes itself in order to provide the up to date leadership and guidance tosmaller teams participating in the program.
Thereby it facilitates a broad and profound approach to the most topical and timely
issues of fusion research.
As a result even small groups can make the difference addressing difficult questions.
Therefore, they become highly competitive and well known.
● The three types of Domestic Collaborations are overseen by the Collaboration Committee,
which is set up under the NIFS Administrative Council. Of the 44 members of the
Collaboration Committee, 28 members are from outside NIFS.
The Collaboration Committee appears to be functioning properly.
NIFS used a questionnaire to solicit comments from collaborators about Domestic
Collaborations; this was a useful exercise. Most of the comments were positive. NIFS andthe Collaboration Committee will incorporate into future planning the suggestions andrequests that were received.
● Of pivotal importance is the collaborative committee that supervises the collaboration- 11 -

program. There is a balanced number of members from both sides, NIFS and universities.
As an external reviewer I cannot say more on this point.
③Have the results of collaboration research been published properly?
●

The number of publications from the NIFS’s Domestic Collaboration are between
200-400 each year, and about half of them are created by non-NIFS first authors. To IAEA’s
Fusion Energy Conferences, 30-40 contributions are made each time. Around 10 out of the
figures are by non-NIFS first authors. Considering that the Domestic Collaboration
annually handles 400-500 activities, quite a high percentage of the activities have come toacademic publications. Therefore, it is reasonable to see the Domestic Collaboration isfull-fledged work of high quality. At the FEC2010, a lot of results from the Domestic
Collaboration were presented, and impressively, many of them were picked up at thesummary section on the final day of the event. Therefore, the efforts toward publication as
well as the performance are both extremely highly commended. (9)● The efforts for publication, including the arrangement of the debriefing session, areappropriate and basically highly commended. Particularly the work regarding the BilateralCollaboration is highly appraisal as members ask for the community’s opinions after
presenting their results in a meeting like its symposiums at JSPF. (3)● NIFS is working to cover half of a contribution cost and provide similar support. Sucheffort is highly commended. (2)● Although results of the programs are available online, it is not accessible enough. They
should be located on an upper directory of the website. Paperback editions are fine as they
are now. (1)● Further effort to disseminate results is expected, such as arranging a session for eachprogram, if possible, in the meetings of society. (1)● The performance is good in terms of the number of publications. The portion of foreign
first authors is expected to increase. University’s researchers will have to be encouraged toserve as a theme leader of the LHD Project as they are now. (1)● The LHD Project is highly commended in that it draws attention from prestigious journals
and international conferences, and therefore it leads the mainstream of fusion research. The
Bilateral Collaboration has to gain such attention so as to ensure its international
competitiveness in a long run, while it is expected to support universities in terms ofresearch and education from a wider standpoint, which gained through its middle-sized
experimental activities. More PR effort would be also necessary targeting researchers
across a wide range of fields. (1)● A yearly report of the Domestic Collaboration and the Annual Report often overlap
considerably. If the former could be published in English, the latter should be given up.
- 12 -

From a standpoint of saving money, it might be also a good idea to print out an index only
and put the rest into a CD. If significant results are released as news on the website, it
might have more impact. (1)● It is better to oblige authors to put a clear acknowledgement if they are supported by the
Bilateral Collaboration. Paper contribution to prestigious journals is expected to increase
from the program. (1)● There is no system at NIFS to provide financial support to researchers of the Domestic
Collaboration for covering their travel fees abroad. That seemingly discourages them toparticipate in IAEA-FEC conferences. If such system is prepared, the number ofpresentations is believed to increase. (1)● The publication of the Domestic Collaboration results is adequate and highly commended,
but further attempt will be necessary in a way of publication, so that outcomes are exposed
to various assessments including the assessment from a public standpoint. (1)●Within collaboration framework, the gradual increase of outside collaborators’
contribution to the overall publications is promising trend. It is, however, important toinvestigate reasons of decreasing number of published papers after 2006 peak.
● Although the number of publications constitutes a very crude criterion of the scientificactivity it is impressive and remains within the range of 100 to 200 over the years startingfrom 2004.
Some variations are natural and inherent within the scope of an interdisciplinary
program.
Furthermore, the number of presentations from the program constituting highlights offusion activities is reported at the biannual IAEA Fusion Energy Conference triggering a lotof interest and admiration to the results obtained by the program managed by NIFS.
The number is a significant part of the total ranging from 30 to 40 on each occasion.
● Many papers based on results from collaboration research have been published each year
during the period 2004-2009. The total number of such papers has ranged from a high of~400 (in 2006) to a low of ~200 (in 2009). I expect that the larger numbers of papers
published in the years 2004, 2006, and 2008 are explained by the biennial occurrence of the
IAEA Fusion Energy Conference in those years. There appears to be a slight tail-off in the
total number of publications, if one compares 2009 to 2007 and 2005; presumably thistrend is a temporary anomaly.
The number of collaboration research papers with NIFS scientists as first authors and thenumber with non-NIFS scientists as first authors are about equal each year (except in 2008).
The number of presentations at the IAEA Fusion Energy Conference with non-NIFS
scientists as first authors is actually increasing, which would indicate that the Domestic
Collaborations are being successful in strengthening the research activities at universities.
● There is a growing percentage of papers published by non-NIFS scientists based on- 13 -

results that were obtained within the collaboration with NIFS. This is a very gooddevelopment that should be further encouraged. Also the percentage of presentations on the
IAEA fusion energy conference is increasing. The slight tendency of decrease of the total
number of papers is not worrying but should be reversed in the future.
④Has the collaboration research progressed based on evaluations over the previous
results?
●

All the three programs require participants to present their outcomes and write reports.
When an application is made for continuing the research, its latest result is assessed withquantitative measures and a decision is made based on the assessment over the continuation.
Adoption and allocation are both done properly. It is considerably demanding work, but it
is carried out as it should be. The effort is highly commended. (7)● The Bilateral Collaboration has been properly improved based on advice by the 2005
External Peer Review Committee as well as by the program’s external reviewers for
2007-2008. The composition and election of the Bilateral Collaboration’s committee
members were reviewed, and the Centers started a steering system of high transparency byincluding external personnel. The efforts are highly commended. (5)● The Domestic Collaboration is operated based on the assessment over its previous
performance, which is basically appropriate. A problem is that NIFS’s argument for the
future plan including LHD is a little hard to understand. It will need discussion involving
young researchers in particular as well as external personnel, and the discussion should bebased upon what NIFS attained so far. (1)● The LHD Project, which handles NIFS’s main subjects and has a large budget, attracts
attention among higher levels of research journals and international conferences. It isplanned and executed properly. The General Collaboration encompasses a great amount ofactivities, so an overall evaluation cannot be given to it easily. It could not obtain outcomesof high quality without enhancement of diagnostic devices. Prolonged operation of
inefficient work has to be prevented. For the Bilateral Collaboration, it will be important tovigorously discuss a vision from a mid- or long-term standpoint to maximize program
performances to the given direction with limited money. A brave decision like changing a
direction may be necessary according to circumstances. (1)● For the Domestic Collaboration a standard screening process is used for its joint-use
application, and the process is widely adopted by inter-university research institutes.
However, an evaluation method has to differ between for seminal studies and for
project-type collaborations which already have a clear objective. The former will need acareful evaluation not to neglect support while the latter will need a different approach,such as mid-term monitoring to judge the degree of attainment for selection and- 14 -

concentration. (1)● It is uneasy to evaluate performance and it is challenging to reflect the evaluation on thefollowing operation. Despite such difficulties, the effort is relatively effective. (1)● The evaluation at the LHD Project debriefing session greatly helps the following year’s
activities, so it is commendable. Although the LHD Project has the largest budget among
the three programs, there is no indication about the program in presentations by participants.
It should be mandatory. Meanwhile, when journals oblige authors to do so, which is good
because it visualizes the LHD program’s performance. Regarding the General
Collaboration, it is expected to increase the quality of its activity report. (1)● It is basically highly commended. Meanwhile, there is an increasing expectation to NIFS
for participation and leadership in Japan’s TBM of ITER. If such viewpoint is added toevaluation, engineering-related activities will be more effective and efficient. (1)● As the case of selection process, the evaluation process also followed similar procedure
with “committee” with many outside members for transparency and fairness. Therefore it isreasonable to accept that the collaboration has been guided by evaluation process, witheffectiveness and fairness.
● The progress is indeed impressive.
Numerous Japanese fusion communities are strongly encouraged to contribute to theprogress of Japanese nuclear fusion research by participating in NIFS activities. NIFS isundoubtedly the fore front leader of the world fusion research. LHD device is themasterpiece of fusion engineering.
The synergy of the advanced geometry of the magnetic field, the superconductive coils
and the enhanced heating provides for the achievement of record parameters highly
relevant for fusion. It is obvious that most of results are impossible to achieve on a smallerscale university type facilities. Hence, university groups benefit greatly from theircollaborations with NIFS. The system adopted to incorporate research carried out atuniversities is unique constituting the important Japanese invention. This is also born out
by the results obtained on other important yet smaller devices such as GAMMA 10,
Heliotron -J, QUEST and FIREX -I and other installations.
● Each university research center involved in a Bilateral Collaboration arrangement with
NIFS has established its own local committee, with some of the members from outside that
research center, for managing its Bilateral Collaboration activities. This was done in
response to a previous recommendation from the External Peer Review Committee. The
Bilateral Collaboration Subcommittee of the Collaboration Research Committee reviewsthe experimental plans from these local committees.
Safety conditions have been checked during visits to the Bilateral Collaboration
university research centers. This, too, was done in response to a suggestion from theExternal Peer Review Committee.
- 15 -

It would be useful to construct a complete list of the recommendations concerning
collaboration research that have been made at previous meetings of the External Peer
Review Committee, along with the corresponding response by NIFS to each
recommendation. This type of list is often presented at experimental facility programadvisory committee meetings in the U.S.
I commend the presentations by Prof. Kaneko and Prof. Mito for presenting manystatistics and quantitative data that serve as metrics to indicate how well the various
collaborations are proceeding. This had been a previous Review Committee
recommendation, and NIFS has responded very well to providing this type of information.
● Yes. Previous recommendations have obviously been carefully considered to improve thecollaboration program. In fact, since LHD is operated as an inter-university facility, almost
all previous reviews have extensively addressed this issue. Thus, a frequent monitoring isguaranteed and the collaboration is well embedded into the scientific context. Several
measures were more recently implemented to improve the collaborative network of NIFS,
e.g. collaboration committees, full access to the NIFS network, visitor center etc.
⑤Are the results of the collaboration research accumulated properly as an academic
resource?
●

Outcomes of the Domestic Collaboration have been accumulated in various forms to layan academic foundation, such as articles in journals and presentations at international
conferences. The Bilateral Collaboration in particular is highly valued in terms ofaccumulation performance. During the last term, taking advantage of the Centers’ devices
element research was promoted and many things were found, Results were accumulated asimportant knowledge, and become what the second mid-term plan is based on. The General
Collaboration is very good in that more than half of the publications are by non-NIFS
authors and the number of IAEA-FEC presentations by non-NIFS staff are on the increase.
(6)● Along with the accumulation of knowledge like papers and presentations, NIFS is
working for real data like QUEST data, using its data acquisition system. It is highly
commended in terms of accumulating not only abstract resources but also practicalinformation. (1)● The Domestic Collaboration is considerably highly appreciated in that it promotes
knowledge systematization and increases academic resources in the field that each
university is good at. NIFS and partners gain international recognition for their engineering
work: NIFS for its work in superconducting engineering; Toyama University in tritium
science and technology; University of Tsukuba in gyrotron technologies; NIFS again in
advanced structural materials; and Nagoya and Osaka universities in PSI research. Besides,- 16 -

researchers in a leading position are well renowned and highly praised. Therefore, theDomestic Collaboration has contributed to the enhancement of Japanese intellectual andhuman resources as a whole. (1)● Along with the publication of original papers and presentations at international
conferences, online disclosure of presentation materials and arrangement of organization
repositories are all appropriate. (1)● I believe outcomes have been well accumulated, but I propose the work should bematerialized somehow. It is expected to make it clear how close each research comes to agoal in a bigger picture in terms of the categories like (1) helical confinement, (2)plasma-wall interaction, (3) selection of subjects for designing a demo reactor and so on.
(1)● It has become extremely harder for a national university to develop research on alaboratory by itself since it gained independence. For development and activation of thecommunity, active support to laboratories will be strongly expected. (1)● When evaluating an activity, reviewers should not only assess a reported outcome, butalso its international status and impact level on the relevant studies with an objective scale;such as how much attention it draws from prestigious journals or international conferences,or how many papers list it in their references. (1)● The Annual Report is downloadable for anybody. Once registered, anyone can use thepaper database and the NIFS Article Information System. Maintaining this system itself
would be sufficient to contribute to the progress of fusion research. (1)● The work of accumulation is commendable, but it is a little invisible. New ideas would benecessary about its method. (1)● In bilateral and LHD project collaborations, the collaboration results are well documented,
and these results are indeed very high quality works in academic viewpoint.
● The collaboration research is accumulated properly due to the management structure
invented at NIFS.
Indeed, the administrative council of NIFS promotes the collaboration researchvigorously.
The strategy of the organization of the fusion research in Japan is constantly monitored
and examined.
The decision making is carried out by committees summoned by NIFS.
This system facilitates the feedback and the effective control of the program as a whole
activity focused on the specific goal.
It broadens the range of issues addressed within the framework of fusion researchadjusting to the progress made continuously.
● NIFS is maintaining proper records of the collaboration research activities. Informational
lists were provided to the External Peer Review Committee concerning:- 17 -

• Collaboration programs (354 in number)• Publications (very extensive)• Patents (28 during the 2004-2009 period)• Collaborations by NIFS scientists with companies (34)• Collaborations between NIFS and companies (105)
On an annual basis, university scientists and research centers report about their collaborative research
activities and results at meetings scheduled for this purpose.

●

Two flagships of the collaboration program of NIFS are (1) the joint research on LHD and(2) the bilateral collaboration with larger university facilities. The joint results obtainedwith GAMMA 10, Heliotron-J, QUEST, and FIREX-I are relevant for fusion research andof high quality. The respective four universities also serve as multipliers for the entire
university network. The collaboration on LHD is mainly devoted to diagnostics, which ishere clearly the best field for university research.

⑥Have the circumstances for collaboration been improved?
●

Circumstances are improved such as accommodation, internet environment and safety
management system. The Bilateral Collaboration is outstanding in particular. The Centers
include external personnel into a steering committee and keep working hard to increase
fairness and transparency in steering a program. Conditions for visiting co-researchers,
such as houses and network circumstance at the Centers are steadily getting better. All theefforts are highly commended. (4)● The unification of services into the Visitor Center (the former User’s Office) is beneficial
for visiting co-researchers of the General Collaboration. The work for improvement isbasically highly commended. (4)● The system of cooperative use diagnostic devices was launched in November 2010. As
represented by the effort, support conditions are improved gradually. It is highly
commended. (4)● Support conditions and research surroundings have been considerably improved, which ishighly commended. (2)● In this regard, a continuous effort is desired. While listening to those actually stayed, anadequate level of improvement should be made so as to respond to voices of various
co-researchers. (2)● Laboratory-based researches do not necessarily have sufficient support. Therefore, theintroduction of the cooperative use system and the network-based collaboration isappreciated, but these newly-launched attempts should be vitalized, so further support is
expected. The accommodation facility of Helicon Club is around ten years old. Although I
know it is financially difficult to undergo renovation as frequently as a commercial one- 18 -

does, I suppose the facility needs some repairing work, particularly to the bathrooms, toilets
and air-conditioning systems. (1)● Conditions has been improved well enough. Especially the massively parallel plasma
simulator, which sustains theory and simulation research, is brilliant. The efforts of thoseworking for that are highly commended. (1)● Challenges have been well addressed, and some of them have been cleared. One of theexamples is that a foreign researcher is now allowed to be an applicant now. Such efforts toimprove researchers’ surroundings are highly commended. (1)● The effort for the LHD Project is highly commended as NIFS continuously listens todemands regarding peripheral equipment directly related to studies. What is next is how toturn such voices into an actual improvement. The administrative provisions are also subject
to improvement, but there are still some voices that the work is bureaucratic. (1)● Improvement is seen in research-supporting systems and researchers’ surroundings.
Thoughtful care toward foreign staff is also seen in the attempt of increasing
English-written materials. They are highly commended. (1)● The budget of the Domestic Collaboration now can cover the purchase or the repair of apersonal computer. Use of money has become much more flexible and other conditions are
getting better. The efforts are highly commended. However, I have a concern that a futurebudgetary decline could worsen researchers’ environments. (1)● The NIFS’s effort to make user-friendly environment for collaboration is progressing,such as “Visitor Center”, NIFS Repository, etc. It is also noted that the conveniencefeatures such as “network access” and “inside accommodation” has been provided. The
safety management for collaborators is also improved by utilizing documents with “lessons
learned”. It is, however, the circumstance for foreign collaborators has room for further
improvement.
● The circumstances for collaborations have been revised and improved significantly.
User center has been established employing a user friendly interface.
NIFS Repository has commenced collecting the records, papers, external and internalreports thereby keeping the history of research available and transparent.
Diagnostics equipment is properly stored and available for rent by collaborations teams
and individual researches from the outside of NIFS.
The collaboration teams are rearranged along the lines of the reorganization of researchdivisions.
3 new projects have been launched recently.
The exchange of personnel with universities has been facilitated by providing mobility
both at the “ Personal exchange-type “ and “ Network exchange-type “ levels.
Proposals from foreign researchers may be adopted with exception of “Numerical
Analysis System” although the financial support is limited.
- 19 -

●

NIFS is commended for having instituted a number of useful improvements in the system
for research collaborations.
The increased availability of information about safety procedures for Japanese andinternational researchers is consistent with recommendations from the 2009 External Peer
Review Committee meeting.
Previously, foreign researchers could only work on LHD with Japanese scientists. Now,
international scientists may submit proposals for collaboration research in all categories
except that of Numerical Analysis System, which will allow them to carry out experimentson LHD directly. This, too, is a useful step forward.
While visiting NIFS before and after this year’s External Peer Review Committee
meeting, I personally used the new internet network for external users (Extra-Net). It
functioned well.
The Fusion Network that is administered by NIFS will now allow inter-university
bilateral collaborations to be carried out. This is an excellent development.
The NSTX Program at Princeton issues a guidance letter every year to inform outsidescientists about topical research priorities and collaboration opportunities. The program
letters are posted on the NSTX web site(http://nstx.pppl.gov/DragNDrop/Program_PAC/Program_Letters/). It might be useful for
NIFS to do something like this, especially for the LHD Program.
● Yes. NIFS has developed an impressive program to collaborate with a large network ofJapanese universities. The university groups very often have a particular strength orexpertise in a certain subject/field of plasma physics and engineering. This large network ofuniversity research in plasma physics with a strong link to fusion research is probably
unparalleled in the world. This huge asset of Japanese plasma science has gained strengthand visibility after LHD was introduced as an inter-university facility and NIFS is acting asan agent to stimulate the collaboration with the universities. This is a very remarkableaccomplishment.
⑦ Has the collaboration research helped educating students and young researchers?
● The Domestic Collaboration seems to function in a way that it takes in young researchersand post-doctoral researchers, proposes research subjects, and then yields specialists ofcertain fields. The Bilateral Collaboration and the General Collaboration, in particular, takecare of a large number of students and young researchers, assist thesis production (1000over the past five years) and help many acquire a master or doctor degree. Therefore, theDomestic Collaboration makes a considerable contribution to development of young
personnel and therefore highly commended. (11)- 20 -

●A systematic encouragement will be needed to inspire more PhD students to take part in
NIFS research for the purpose of educating university-lab students. (1)● Although the number of scientific exchanges has increased, the participation of young
researchers is still low. This should be improved. (1)● Believing that project-type collaborations could not sufficiently cover fields in training
young researchers, NIFS is now preparing a new type of collaboration open to universities
in the LHD Project so as to handle an extensive list of subjects. The effort is appropriate.
Meanwhile, the General Collaboration needs careful attention not to lose a primary role ofthe program. If NIFS is willing to take a more serious step for developing young personnel,
it needs to introduce some new measures, like introducing a program in which NIFS
undertakes postgraduate education commissioned by universities, or activating theexchange of young staff equivalent to assistant professors between universities. (1)● Although NIFS’s educational performance for the Graduate University for Advanced
Studies and Nagoya University is limited in number, it will be massive when we include
those who joined the Domestic Collaboration. Most fusion energy researchers should haveexperienced the program during their university days. However, there seem to be only a
few cases that NIFS assistant professor or associate professors moved to other universities
for stepping up their careers. (1)● There is cases that the Domestic Collaboration has led to a job offer at NIFS, which
therefore seems to be a good system. Interactive activities in the General Collaboration
reportedly increase an educational effect, and the Bilateral Collaboration helps develop
human resources as well. They are highly commended. (1)● Further improvement will be expected to the LHD tour and other PR efforts targeting
prospective students. (1)● The contribution is considerably made and highly appreciated. Financial difficulty will be
expected, but the effort should be continued as it is now. (1)● In bilateral collaboration, 25~35 Master Degree and 4~8 Doctoral Degree have beenendowed yearly. It is noted that students and young researchers are benefited fromcollaboration with other university collaborators.
● This activity has made enormous progress lately.
Many first class students have been brought up to the level of prominent scientists
providing the influx of original ideas to both the LHD experimental and fusion theory
programs.
Their presentations have been remarkable and profound addressing a wide variety oftimely and topical issues within the framework of NIFS program.
Many famous universities in Japan contribute by educating excellent students at the
Master and Doctoral levels.
- 21 -

NIFS is completing their mission by giving access to the world largest facilities andteaching them to work successfully in a large team.
In summary, this system sustains a classical scheme of bringing the “ Big Science “ to theuniversity type school of education.
● During 2004-2009, a significant number of students at Kyushu, Kyoto, Osaka, andTsukuba obtained Masters degrees and Ph.D. degrees based on research performed throughBilateral Collaborations.
Tsukuba University provided specific information about how the Bilateral Collaborations
have enhanced the education and research motivation of students and young researchers,
citing an increase in published papers and conference presentations from 120 per annum to
180 per annum, a 50% increase.
In the General Collaborations, students constitute 20% of the collaborators. The largest
absolute number of student collaborators (about 190) work on LHD experiments. Not
unexpectedly, students comprise the largest percentage of collaborators for collaborations
having to do with Numerical Analysis.
● Yes. The access to all NIFS facilities (LHD, supercomputers, instruments etc.) is clearly
an improvement for students and young researchers at Japanese universities. The
collaboration research very much improves their mobility and helps to establish newcontacts, both on national and international level. It is recommended to advertise the NIFS
collaboration to students, who are at the beginning of their career; the outstanding working
conditions in connection with the NIFS collaboration should attract more students to choose
plasma physics as their research field.
2) Future direction①Does the plan in each category suggest a direction based on a long-term vision? Arethey satisfactory as a plan of COE of fusion research?
●

A vision is given to the second mid-term plan and it says that NIFS plans to enlarge
engineering-related activities of the Domestic Collaboration for the purpose of realizationof a helical DEMO. The direction is appropriate and the planned steps along with thedirection are also appropriate. The Bilateral Collaboration particularly has had a big movein this way. It welcomed two new faces of Toyama’s Hydrogen Isotope Research Center
and Tohoku’s International Research Center for Nuclear of Institute for Materials Research(IMR) in 2010. Subjects are selected based on the presumption to be tackled together withmajor topics like LHD, numerical experiment reactors and fusion engineering.
Network-style cooperation connecting the Centers is also under discussion. Thesemovements are appropriate and well correspond to the long-term vision, which is highly- 22 -

commended. (8)● It is appropriate as a whole. For the Bilateral Collaboration using middle-sized devices, it
is not easy to constantly make a high level of achievement with global impact while
assisting university’s extensive work including education and personnel development. Whatis significant there is to create an environment where sufficient discussion can be madeover a long-term vision, including analysis of the world’s trend, selection and concentrationof subjects, or resource allocation between integrative and reductive studies. (2)● The plan for the LHD Project is highly commended as it is based on a long-term vision.
(2)● The nationwide system of collaboration is unique to Japan, and it has been highly fruitfulin terms of activating the research that inevitably depends on larger devices. In this sense,
NIFS’s Domestic Collaboration is highly commended. An inter-university research instituteis to make decisions about a future plan and other issues through discussion with a relevant
community, so NIFS is expected to continuously take counsel with the community throughvarious channels including the Fusion Network. (2)● I deeply hope that NIFS will have a strong resolve to bring about a fusion reactor to Japanand will keep operating the Domestic Collaboration in a long run. It should not go back tomere plasma-confinement research. (1)● The future direction of the Bilateral Collaboration is basically highly commended, but its
long-term vision is a little invisible. It may need to be reviewed based on a budgetarysituation. The plan of the General Collaboration and that of the Coordination Research are
fine, but the both partly lack the perspectives of a long-term vision. I suppose they alsoneed reviewing. (1)● The total number of papers and doctor’s degree acquisitions has been decreasing at NIFS
and the Centers since full-fledge work of ITER Project began. The tendency may be partly
due to a budget cut. What NIFS should do then is to give direction to DEMO research forseeing material potential while supporting ITER of course. A scenario should be clearlydrawn about how to supplement materials’ limitation with system designing, based on latest
data. (1)● What is good about the LHD Project is that it handles basic topics as well as
project-related subjects in a bid to activate university research and develop humanresources. It is an innovative idea to integrate core plasma research and engineeringresearch in the Bilateral Collaboration and further development is expected in this way. A
long-term vision on the General Collaboration is a little invisible from the report but thismay be attributed to the nature of the program. (1)● In order to make activities more effective and efficient, it is expected that NIFS will takean initiative among universities in the way to a helical DEMO reactor. (1)● In the 2nd mid-term period, the promotion of fusion engineering research and the- 23 -

contribution to the demo concept, are targeted for two major goals. In this direction, thetwo newly joined institutes in the bilateral collaboration cover the study of tritium andirradiated materials. Therefore, the plan for collaboration in the 2nd mid-term period wellmatched two major goal of same period. Also, these 2nd mid-term collaboration plans
shared the key issues of NIFS’ major research projects such as LHD, Numerical
Experiment, and Fusion Engineering, in line with COE function of NIFS.
● The plan is very specific and clearly outlined.
Two new universities join the bilateral collaboration programs.
This represents the important extension for issues required for DEMO such as tritium
handling technology and irradiation caused by high energy neutrons.
Of course, key issues faced by LHD, Numerical simulations and Fusion Engineering will
be addressed in depth.
Already approved projects include heating of the Super Dense Core plasma in LHD by
Bernstein waves and control of recycling by a novel divertor scheme.
These improvements may result in the record performance in the near future.
● The numbers of different types of NIFS collaborations, as well as their diversity andbreadth, are truly impressive. The management of these collaborations by NIFS as a Centerof Excellence for fusion and plasma physics has been outstanding.
The plan to continue with the present three types of Domestic Collaborations isreasonable. New developments are planned for the Fusion Network (in particular, toenhance collaborations among participating institutions) and for the enhancement of fusion
engineering-related collaborations. Both of these developments may require additional
budgetary resources.
● The long-term vision of the plan is the joint-effort to solve the remaining issues in physics
and technology on the way to fusion as a clean, abundant, safe energy for the next century.
In this sense, fusion research is by nature goal-oriented and follows a well-defined plan.
Nevertheless, it is scientifically sound to provide room for curiosity-driven research. Here,the bilateral and the general collaboration with the Japanese universities play a particularly
important role. The young generation of researchers in the universities approach known
problems with a fresh attitude. In this very best sense, the collaboration program acts as a
COE for Japanese fusion science.
The NIFS plans to increase collaboration on engineering can only be applauded. There isan enormous engineering know-how available in Japanese universities, which is absolutely
needed for the development of a fusion reactor prototype.
②Does the collaboration research function as a pivot for advancing new studies, such asa program under the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research?
- 24 -

●New developments occurs out of the three programs of the Domestic Collaboration invarious areas. They are open to younger studies targeting basic sciences. The survey on theDomestic Collaboration shows that as many as 188 studies based on the programs haveacquired external funding, which suggests that the program has effectively been a bed for a
new research. It is highly commended. (3)●A new type of network coordination, currently in preparation under the BilateralCollaboration, is expected to have a high potential of education. Coordination items are
subject to budget request, so I look forward to seeing the outcome of the effort. The policyof the LHD Project is highly commended in that the program will serve as a basis in theframework of fusion and plasma science, helping domestic organizations make abreakthrough. The General Collaboration is planned to become more interactive, whichmeets a demand well and deserves a high mark. (2)●The next mid-term plan says that all the engineering-related collaborations is to be
developed for the realization of a helical DEMO. It is basically commended. (1)●The Domestic Collaboration is a good place for NIFS and universities to compete eachother in a complementary or synergistic manner. From the standpoint, the parallel operationof the comprehensive studies and the well-directed project researches are adequate. The
NIFS Project of numerical experiment, for instance, which focuses a numerical test reactor,
is meaningful for universities because it motivates them to study theory and simulation. I
hope the project researches will make an evolution and increase competitiveness. (1)●It seems possible for a university researcher to carry out fruitful research while making an
self-independent effort such as applying for the Grand-in-Aid for Scientific Research. The
distance of the Domestic Collaboration from university researchers is proper andcommendable. Because too much dependence on NIFS may impede scientific advancement,
it is better that co-researchers are commonly aware of the significance of a self-help effort.
(1)●

The Domestic Collaboration is commendable as it is good as a basis for a new attempt.
(1)●

Another evolution could be expected if the way of disclosing outcomes is improved andthe evaluation process is more systematized. The result of the efforts this time will appear
in several years. (1)●There has not been outstanding output so far, but basically the current method seems
proper. I have a little worry as the budget for the Domestic Collaboration, particularly for- 25 -

the Bilateral Research and the LHD Project, has been declining over the past a few years.
(1)●

Amid the increased awareness that the realization of a fusion-power reactor needs
cooperation of domestic researchers across many fields, it is commendable to let theDomestic Collaboration be a base for new exploration. The General Collaboration is
expected to be more open to many people. The successful internationalization of theDomestic Collaboration is basically valuable. Fair and sensible operation is desired. (1)●Among the three programs, the LHD Project can be highly assessed in this perspective.
But the other two, particularly the General Collaboration, seemingly fail to bring about new
developments. It makes me say they are just fine. (1)●A new system has been introduced to allow co-researchers to use some of NIFS’s devices.
This is an extremely useful measure for universities, so I hope the system will be expanded
as much as possible. (1)●An considerable effort is expected so that the Bilateral Collaboration will bring out a new
development. (1)● In the summary of questionnaires’ response from 136 collaborators, 435 Bachelor degree,
519 Master degree, and 92 Doctor degree have been endowed through participating
collaboration program with NIFS. It is also recorded that 188 Grant-in-Aid are received by
NIFS collaborators with subjects related to the collaboration program. Therefore, it isdemonstrated that NIFS collaboration activities provided many opportunities for new
research grants for advancing new studies.
● NIFS program constitutes a powerful vehicle driving the collaboration research forward.
It is pivotal in achieving the near term and long term goals of fusion research.
However, the progress is the subject of resources available for financing the program.
To this end, the budget cannot be cut any further if the results and the output are
determined to remain at the current level.
● Responses from 136 of the collaborating institutions reported that 188 Grants-in-Aid for
Scientific Research related to the NIFS collaboration program had been obtained during thefirst mid-term period and that a very large number of students had graduated with Bachelor,
Master, and Doctoral degrees after participating in the collaboration program. These arevery good indications that the Domestic Collaborations are successfully functioning toadvance new studies.
A significant concern is the recent reduction of the 2010 budget for BilateralCollaborations (the largest of the three collaboration categories, down by ¥100K = 13%
from 2009), with this budget now being folded in with the budget for LHD Project
Collaborations (down ~¥50K) and General Collaborations (constant). If this reduction- 26 -

continues, the Collaboration Committee and the NIFS Coordination Research Project will
have to more strongly prioritize research proposals, which will lead to a reduction in theacceptance rate (currently at almost 99%). Establishing reasonable criteria for suchprioritization will be important.
● The simple fact that NIFS pools the know-how, which is available in the Japanese
university system, makes the collaboration research program pivotal for the field. The
access to the NIFS facilities and the huge know-how of the NIFS staff opens up newhorizons for university groups. This becomes evident by the large number (188) ofgrant-in-aid contracts and graduations (about 1000 in total), that are directly related to thecollaboration.
It must be emphasized that further budget cuts would endanger the future of this highly
successful collaboration model. Conversely, a due budget increase would have a stabilizing
effect and would allow to start new and urgently required activities.

- 27 -

(2)International collaboration research1）International collaboration research based on inter-governmental agreements①Has NIFS fulfilled its responsibility as an implementing agency?
●

NIFS has sufficiently fulfilled its responsibility as an implement agency of international
cooperation like Japan-US, Japan-South Korea, Japan-China and the International Energy
Agency (IEA) activities, which is extremely highly commended. (9)● I extend my sincere gratitude to NIFS’s administrative section because university staff
have been well cared, particularly in doing his/her administrative work. (1)● Despite the fact that a governmental treaty is outdated, research cooperation of highquality has been maintained between Japan and the United States thanks to the efforts byrelevant bodies including NIFS. The cooperation has significantly promoted research of thetwo nations. It is strongly desired to keep the level of cooperation continuously. (1)● NIFS’s Japan-US program has greatly advanced fusion research of the two nations. About
200 people are annually exchanged, around 100 papers are created each year, and outcomes
have been well accumulated. (1)● Output of the Japan-US program should not only be presented at the annual reporting
session but also be argued at other meetings. Studies of the program are getting mature, so
discussion is to be started over new subjects. The Japan-US safety monitoring should be put
to end as it has completed its mission. (1)● According to its strategy, the United States appears to be less enthusiastic about work withJapan, compared to work for South Korea and its device of KSTER (Korea
Superconducting Tokamak Advanced Research) or China and its EAST (Experimental
Advanced Superconducting Tokamak). A strategy should be designed to activate
collaborations in connection with LHD and JT-60SA (JT-60SA is a large tokamak device
owned by JAEA, a superconducting version of JT-60U. JT-60SA also refers to a project
itself, as one of the BA activities which research steady-state operation ofhigh-performance plasma that ITER cannot deal with). (1)● The IEA cooperation is basically highly commended. NIFS has chaired the agreement on
the development of the Stellarator/Heliotron concept, and has served as a coordinator with
the German partner for the Coordinated Working Group activities, which suggests it has
exercised leadership. (1)● Another IEA agreement over steady-state operation is under discussion. Japanese devices
like LHD and QUEST are designed to pursue such subject, and Japan has a considerable
interest in engineering research. Therefore, it is preferred to extend research to an- 28 -

international level rather than to focus an individual device. (1)● The numbers of 25 sent out to China and 50 coming from China show how actively
people are exchanged between Japan and China. Besides, NIFS has carried out
collaborations with South Korea and with IEA. (1)● Regarding Japan-South Korea cooperation as well as Japan-China cooperation, a planshould be made based on a fifty-fifty relationship, and rules should be established on
publication. It needs to be argued how the programs could contribute to Japan’s researchesof tokamak, helical and fusion engineering. (1)● China and South Korea have been working for a three-country framework. It is necessary
for Japan to strategically determine its stance toward the movement. (1)● NIFS does an excellent job of executing the three collaboration exchange programs basedon inter-governmental agreements with the U.S., Korea, and China. On behalf of Japan,
NIFS also is involved in managing activities related to IEA implementing agreements.
● The number of workshops and the number of exchange scientists for the overall US-Japan
collaboration program have declined over the past decade by about 25%, due to budget
limitations. However, the number of resulting publications has remained constant, which
could be a sign of increased efficiency and which certainly indicates how these joint
activities are considered to be valuable. Students have participated in these joint activities(e.g., eight Ph.D. theses resulted from TITAN collaborations during 2007-2008 and five
Ph.D. theses from JIFT activities during 2007-2010). In 2010, the 30th anniversary of the
US-Japan Fusion Cooperation program was celebrated, and a report will be published tocommemorate this milestone. I would like to thank NIFS for its strong support of thisbilateral cooperation program, which has led to numerous publications and invited
presentations at conferences (e.g., the activities of the Japan-US Joint Institute for Fusion
Theory resulted in 120 papers published in journals and 17 invited presentations at IAEA
Fusion Energy Conference during the past decade).
● The international collaboration of NIFS has currently four pillars: (1) Japan-US, (2)Japan-South Korea, (3) Japan-China, (4) IEA implementing agreements. The latter are
multi-lateral agreements on collaboration. The one on stellarators and heliotrons exists
already for 20 years. All four areas of collaborative activity seem to be well implementedand (partially highly) active. Hence, NIFS is very well fulfilling its responsibility as animplementing agency for international collaboration. It will be interesting to see, to what
extend the university partners of NIFS will benefit from this role in the future.
● The collaboration activities and its results proved that NIFS fulfilled its responsibility as
an implementing agency well and appreciated by counter-part of international
collaborations.
● NIFS has fulfilled the responsibility as an implementing agency for International
collaboration research based on inter-governmental agreements thoroughly and in depth.
- 29 -

●All of the foreign institutes benefit greatly from the experience gained on the hardware
and software development of the LHD which is the world leader in fusion science andengineering. NIFS is also instrumental in training young fusion scientists from all over theworld, in particular from the Asian region.

②Are the policy and plan for future collaboration satisfactory?
●

Regarding the extensive work of the international programs, the policy gives proposals to
individual activities in a way that each takes advantage of parties. The policy is concrete,
and therefore, it is extremely highly commended. (4)●The policy, “The significance of Japan-US cooperation in science and technology is wellrecognized by the both countries. NIFS will work for reviving the outdated
inter-governmental agreement in order to raise the cooperation up to a national level.” isappropriate and extremely highly commended. I strongly hope that the effort will become
paid off. (2)●Discussion has begun over new specifications and requirements about ITER’s
superconducting coils. The work is very important as it is part of efforts to lay an academic
foundation and systematize knowledge. What is particularly important for Japan there is totake the initiative in establishing a global standard. Therefore, it is necessary for NIFS to
add this viewpoint to its international programs. (1)● The plans on Japan-US cooperation over ITER, on Japan-South Korea cooperation, on
IEA cooperation and on the Asia Core University Program are highly appreciated. But thescale and content of the programs should be reviewed after clarifying what is an objective
and what parties will gain through an activity. (1)● The Japan-US cooperation depends on devices of the United States. It seems better to use
devices of the both sides. (1)● The Japan-US cooperation is highly valued. Travel fees are usually fully covered, butsometimes researchers have to pay for themselves when having additional duties during a
trip. I hope the payment will become more flexible as it used to be. (1)●It is appropriated that the Japan-US Cooperation is going to cover the subjects that ITER
cannot deal with . Regarding the TITAN (Tritium, Irradiation and Thermofluid for America
and Nippon) Project and the JIFT (Joint Institute of Fusion Theory), the way of calling for
application should be more attractive and more understandable. (1)●Although there are a few things to note, the Japan-South Korea Cooperation andJapan-China Cooperation are basically adequate. (1)●The current plan is highly appreciated. However, the Japan-US Cooperation and- 30 -

Japan-China Cooperation will not be subject to budgetary request anymore, so it needs
reconsideration from the budgetary planning. (1)●Considering a recent shift of a research base to Asia from the United States and Europe,
the trilateral cooperation of Japan, South Korea and China should gain a definite position.
The three nations should join hands in the framework of steady-state operation, and asystem for that need to be established. Personnel dispatch with more money is desired. (1)●It is expected that NIFS’s international programs will expedite an interactive flow offindings between parties, will increase intellectual and human resources of Japan, as well as
develop young talents. It is also expected to help advancement of Japan’s fusion research.
(1)● The policies and plans appear to be satisfactory.
● It has been agreed that the US-Japan Joint Activity will be continued and evenstrengthened. However, the inter-governmental agreement still remains unsigned after five
years, due to legal complications. Fortunately, the cooperation activities have been (andwill be) able to continue on the basis of inter-institutional agreements. Some exchange
activities have been revised (e.g., the close out of Joint Computational Projects in the JIFT
program by mutual agreement). Others will be reviewed (e.g., how to continue after
expiration of the TITAN project in 2013).
● In the plan for the future, it is foreseen to strengthen all four existing pillars. This is verymuch supported since all of them are well working. NIFS is recommended to start with thedevelopment of a detailed plan how to collaborate in future with the device Wendelstein
7-X, the large superconducting stellarator under construction by the Max-Planck Institutefor Plasma Physics in Germany. After start of plasma operation in 2015, this device will
deliver complementary information on the key issues of stellarator physics. Here NIFS
should become one of the key players in the international collaboration. This requires an
early start of the planning and exchange of personnel beyond the present level.
● The reduction of fund may limit its full potential to maximum utilization. So it isadvisable to expand its program further to its full potential.
● The policy and the plan for future collaborations are definitely satisfactory due to thebroad range of options offered by NIFS activities. However, it is important to keep in mind
that the plan is strongly dependent on the financing of the program in the coming years. To
this end, it should not be reduced. On the contrary, it calls for an increase in order to carryout the policy and to realize the plans.
2) International collaboration research based on inter-institutional agreements① Does each program take advantage of characteristics of the agreed institutes?
- 31 -

●Collaborations in the framework are actively underway in partnership with
distinctive world-class institutes, which is highly commended. For instance, NIFS and
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory carry out an interactive research using the major
devices of the both institutes while NIFS and University of Texas at Austin undertake along-running collaboration taking advantage of strong points of each other, that is,computation simulation and theoretical analysis. NIFS and Max Plank Institute for Plasma
Physics send one another around 10 people annually, and let visiting researchers join
research at the other site using the helical devices of the two. (9)●An coordination with other area should be strongly promoted, such as the fields of superlarge calculations using super computers or reactor engineering related to atomic power. (1)● The ongoing international collaborations, which use foreign establishments like fusion
devices, irradiation facilities, and tritium centers, help us know the world’s scientific trend.
Japan has only a few bases of irradiation or tritium, so cooperation using such facilities
outside Japan is meaningful, which is highly commended. (1)● There are many joint activities underway using fusion devices overseas, but some are alittle unclear in terms of what features are used to make an academic contribution.
Considering a budgetary situation, it may be time now to review the activities and sort out
what is necessary and what is not. (2)● Although there are no budgetary provisions on an individual base, collaborations are
virtually carried out across many fields based on agreements. The whole activities havebeen categorized as NIFS’s internationally coordination project since April 2010, andwhich now allows the activities to conduct based on a longer-term vision. The effort isconsiderably highly commended. (1)● NIFS participates in inter-institutional agreements with 15 institutions in nine countries.
Six of these agreements were established in the mid-1990s, and another nine a decade later
during the period 2005-2009. The collaborative research programs for the respective
agreements certainly take advantage of institutional strengths (e.g., fusion theory with the
University of Texas, materials studies with ORNL, fusion technology with UCLA).
● The involved institutes usually contribute with their specific expertise to the program.
This is a working system as the long list of specific activities proves.
● The diversity of collaborators is very wide, from universities, national laboratories, andinternational organization. It seems that NIFS focused its collaboration with each institution
with its strength to take advantage of diverse nature of collaborators. It is also mutually
beneficial to focus on mutual interest and strength of collaboration partners.
● Each program benefits strongly from a field of expertise of every institute involved inInternational collaboration research based on inter-governmental agreements.
● LHD also gives boost to new large experiments in Asia by sharing the experience and- 32 -

expertise gained during many years of operation of LHD.
②Is the strategy that includes ITER and BA appropriate?
●

NIFS plans to conclude an comprehensive agreement with the ITER Organization. It alsoplans to promote joint activities and human exchanges related to design, construction andexperiment-planning of ITER. It has established the Rokkasho Research Center in the
Rokkasho village in preparing for coordination with JAEA. Considering all the efforts, thestrategy is commendable. (6)● NIFS will need to internationalize its role as an inter-university research institute whileheading for the goal of the realization of a helical DEMO. From this standpoint, thecurrently planned activities seem appropriate. (2)● The ITER project and the BA activities are at center of the world’s fusion research. Japanis highly expected to make contribution to them and it is a great opportunity for Japan todemonstrate its presence. So collaborations should be conducted with the awareness of that.
NIFS has actually been of great assistance in terms of administrative as well as advisory
work. It has also helped advancement of physics and science, which is represented by theefforts for ITPA. For engineering and technical cooperation, NIFS has given advice basedon its own experiences using the large superconducting device and has provided otherpractical supports in conducting experiments. The proposal that NIFS will continuously dosuch work is basically highly commended. What is expected from now on there is that
NIFS will join and take an initiative in the TBM Project of ITER. (1)●The university community including NIFS desires an active involvement in the ITER
Project. For that, what steps to take should be decided and systematic provisions should be
prepared. I strongly expect them. (1)●Key to success of fusion power generation is reactor materials. After pursuing the best,material limitation has to be covered by designing. Therefore, it is meaningful that anemphasis is put on the development of DEMO materials. (1)●Despite a difference in configuration, helical and tokamak could share reactor
components and many other issues. It is expected that ITER research is effectively used indesigning a helical reactor. (1)●The strategy is basically appropriate, but it is necessary to increase the involvement in the
ITER/BA work, pick up key subjects, and scrutinize the contents. (1)● LHD’s contribution to ITPA is extremely important. There is no other device in the world
than LHD that can maintain high-temperature, high-density plasma for as long as 400
seconds. I hope NIFS will increase the LHD contribution, bearing in mind it appeals to therest of the world. (1)- 33 -

●The three tasks commissioned by the ITER Organization suggest there is an expectation
to a new development by NIFS based on its experiences and skills, which, I hope, will be
explicitly shown somehow. (1)● NIFS has a service contract with the ITER Organization to resolve engineering issues
related to construction. NIFS scientists are involved in ITER physics issues through theInternational Tokamak Physics Activity (ITPA). A NIFS scientist is a member of the ITER
Science and Technology Advisory Committee; the NIFS Director General is a member of
the ITER Council.
● NIFS plans to carry out joint development with JAEA of central solenoid and error field
superconducting magnets (and performance tests) for the JT-60SA facility underconstruction as part of the Broader Approach. NIFS also provided advice about assemblyand quality assurance for JT-60SA. NIFS has an office at the Broader Approach site in
Rokkasho-mura, and a NIFS scientist is currently serving as director of operations for thethree projects at the International Fusion Energy Research Center at the Broader Approachsite. Also, the NIFS Deputy Director General is a member of the Broader Approach
Steering Committee, and a NIFS scientist is a member of the Satellite Tokamak Program
Board.
● A new player arises with ITER. During the long construction phase, ITER is specificallyinterested in engineering support. It is not clear to what extend NIFS can handle such a
support without hampering operation and upgrade of LHD. Maybe NIFS could act as anagent to establish suitable links to Japanese universities that are strong in engineeringsciences.
● NIFS included international collaboration programs including ITER as well as BA, invery appropriated manners. However, it is recommended to expand its contribution andcollaboration to ITER and BA, as far as the NIFS’ resource could provide.
● NIFS has concluded 3 important tasks contributing to ITER design and performance. This
activity should be given the highest priority. BA is a complimenting program vital to Japan.
Therefore, it seems mandatory to highlight relevant issues to ITER and BA in making
decisions on the priority of different scenario to be realized on the LHD.
3) International collaboration research under the National Institutes of Natural Science①Is the program productive?
●

National Institutes of Natural Sciences (NINS) launched a scheme in 2005 called“Forming Bases for Interdisciplinary and International Research through Cooperation crossField of Study”. Part of the scheme is a project of “Building the International ResearchCentral Network”, which was proposed by NIFS. The scheme was continued till 2009, and- 34 -

during the period, more than 490 people were exchanged as a total supported by the scheme.
Now a successor project of “Promotion of the International Research Central Networking”
has been underway since 2010. The efforts have led to NIFS’s new agreements between six
more institutes include Germany’s Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH and France’s
University of Provence, which are well commended. (3)● The NIFS-proposed project under the NINS’s inter-disciplinary scheme has helped
internationalization of domestic bases including NIFS and Kyoto University (for researchof improving confinement in an advanced helical system). It has produced a number ofresults through international work of the relevant fields, which is highly commended. (1)● More examples of NINS international coordination in connection with magnetic fusion
should have been shown. (2)● Effectiveness of the NINS-initiated activities is not tangible enough yet, to be honest. (1)● The inter-NINS-member cooperation basically occurs upon scholarly issues. It should
promote tie-ups eagerly in the fields such that fusion research is good at, or that it leads
other researches over. (1)● It may be a little meaningless to limit the argument to the NINS-based activities only, but
it is true there are meaningful changes in there. One of them is that the scheme now enables
NINS to help its members secure budget to conduct an international collaboration. That led
to the new framework of International Coordination Research, which is highly commended.
(1)● There is a tendency that NIFS concludes an agreement between a lot of institutes, which
is basically appreciated. However, NIFS’s human resource is limited and there is a little
concern whether these agreements could be effective and fruitful in a practical sense. (1)● It is intangible what differs the international activities initiated by NINS from those by
NIFS. A difference should be made clearly. Therefore, I can give it just a passing score. (1)● Although there is a financial limitation, it contains attractive proposals about researchsubjects. It is well expendable. (1)● The collaboration research under NINS is focused on internationalization and the
top-level management of the collaborative actions. In that sense, the program appears to be
productive.
● In the 2nd mid-term period, NIFS focuses on the topics related to the advanced area ofplasma, so that the productiveness of collaboration could be judged with outcome in later
period.
● A great experience in networking and spreading of the scientific results gained by NIFS
serves well the NINS ambition to form the “ Base for Interdisciplinary and International
Research through Cooperation across Field of Study “.
● It appears that these NINS cooperative activities may strongly overlap with the Academic
Agreement collaborative activities, since the cooperating international institutions are- 35 -

identical.
4) Voluntary contributions for other International collaboration programs (ITPA, etc.)①Are the contributions satisfactory in terms of NIFS’s duty?
●

Thirteen out of 50 members of ITPA’s topical groups are NIFS researchers. Besides, NIFS
staff serves as members in the ITER Executive Council, the ITER Science and Technology
Advisory Committee, the BA steering committee and other major international groups.
Such a voluntary contribution is highly commended. (9)● Taking advantage of LHD experiences, NIFS is making contribution in the area of 3-D
helical physics, where it may take the initiative among the ITPA activities. In this sense it ishighly commended. (2)● It is hoped that financial support will be increased to those, including university members,
who are doing voluntary international work (particularly support to travel expenses). (1)● Contribution basically seems to be well made. However, NIFS should not be satisfied
with reporting the participation. I hope it will increase the involvement, pick up key
subjects, and share the experiences with LHD researches. (1)● It is significant to make contribution with LHD under the global attention, appealing to
the world that there are issues that do not matter magnetic configurations, or that only LHD
can handle. The former will be those related to fluctuation and fast ions while the latter are
steady-state operation over 400 seconds. They should be appealed. (1)●Of the official 49 participants from Japan for the seven ITPA Topical Groups, NIFS
provides 12 participants (2 for Diagnostics, 3 for energetic particles, none for Integrated
Operational Scenarios, 2 for MHD, 2 for Pedestal, 2 for SOL/Divertor, and 2 for Transport).
Of course, scientists other than the official Topical Group participants may also attend thetwice-yearly Topical Group meetings. Also, a NIFS scientist is a member of the ITPA
Coordinating Committee, which meets once a year.
● NIFS scientists participate regularly in five of the seven ITPA Topical Groups, with 1-3
participants per topical group meeting. During 2009 and 2010, approximately 10 NIFS
scientists participated in the annual spring and fall series of ITPA Topical Group
meetings—hence the total figure of 20 cited for NIFS attendance at the Topical Group
meetings each year. An average of 10 NIFS participants per each series of workshops isrespectable.
● Two NIFS scientists who were ITPA Topical Group participants were involved asco-editors of the document “Progress in ITER Physics Basis,” which was published by the
ITPA in the journal Nuclear Fusion 2007.
- 36 -

●

NIFS had contributed actively to the ITPA activities by participants about 20 persons per
year. The 3D physics related issues had been contributed by utilizing LHD research, so it iswell posed with respect to NIFS’ duty and strength. However, it is also recommended that
NIFS could expand its participation further to the all major area of ITPA issues, as far as its
resource could provide to enhance its role and presence in fusion research world-wide.
● NIFS is very well represented in the ITPA activity. About 20 LHD and other helicalplasma researchers have attended the ITPA meetings each year thereby making a significant
contribution to ITPA activities. Among the highlights, ELM control problems must be
mentioned since it represents the most topical issue for ITER at present.

- 37 -

(3)Joint Research1）

Research cooperation within the National Institutes of Natural Sciences①Is the cooperation productive?
●

Coordinated work has been underway in various forms and its performance is highly
commended. As an attempt on the cross-sectional themes of “Imaging Science” and“Hierarchy and Holism in National Science”, a number of joint activities and symposiums
have been held, and in 2008 NIFS played a leading role for a NINS-sponsored international
symposium. Meanwhile, interdisciplinary work by researchers has also produced someresults, like, for example, 20 papers in connection with spectrographic research, which isrelated to LHD as well as solar studies. (7)● “Imaging Science” is an interdisciplinary theme encompassing a wide range of fields.
Brain science or imaging measurement using microwaves of cosmic plasmas, X-rays andfast-visible cameras may hold the potential to be effective coordination. A system is getting
ready for them and an achievement is expectable there. The joint research using the solar
observation satellite Hinode is highly commended for performance so far. (1)● The joint research between IMS (Institute for Molecular Science) on simulation ofnear-field imaging of nano-particles has been fruitful and is highly commended. (1)● It is an appropriate approach to join hands upon diagnostic devices like imaging
technology. It will have to be strongly promoted as it is. (1)● What is vital in joint research is for those from different fields to share a common baseand bring technologies that each party is good at. Coordination should be strongly
encouraged around technologies which fusion research is good at, or with which it takes alead over other researches. (1)● The NINS joint research is highly commended as it brings about a fresh scientificapproach. (1)● Although a lot of efforts have been made, it is extremely difficult for those from totallydifferent fields to jointly produce something in nothing. Besides, researchers are usually outof touch each other. In spite of these disadvantages, the inside-NINS cooperation has
somehow produced results through activities coordinated between closer fields. It iscommendable. (1)● The “Imaging Science” effort seems to be getting fruitful, but it is still invisible fromoutside whether it has produced any concrete achievements specific to NIFS or not. If NIFS
has more communication with NAOJ (National Astronomical Observatory of Japan) andgives more explanations to cosmic phenomena, the work will be more understandable for- 38 -

ordinary people. (1)● The cooperation still remains mere exchange of information for individual researchers. I
expect that it will evolve into the one that can make an innovation. What is extremely
important in this field in particular is it becomes a catch to the public. A continuous effort
to this end is expected. (1)● NIFS organized the first NINS international symposium, which was held in 2008 on theinterdisciplinary theme of “hierarchy and holism,” one of two thrusts (both computational)
within NINS for which NIFS provides leadership. NIFS also organized six symposia on theinterdisciplinary interaction of computer simulation science and signal transduction.
● It is a challenge to conduct really meaningful cross-disciplinary research. The NINS
initiative to bring together scientists from neighboring or even far distant science areas isambitious and deserves support. An outstanding productivity, however, should not be
expected. In this light, the achievements made are already very good.
● It has a few potentially productive area of collaborations such as “Imaging science” andmaterials. However, it is too early to assess its full potential of productivity yet.
● NIFS also contributes to the major research carried out by NINS members NAOJ andInstitute for Molecular Science. It is obvious that the expertise of NIFS in fields of“ Imaging Science” and “ Hierarchy and Holism in Natural Science” is of great value forthese 2 institutes.
2) Domestic research cooperation based on inter-institutional agreements①Does each program take advantage of characteristics of the agreed institutes?
●

It is highly commended that the NIFS is in partnership with universities across Japan
upon an inter-institutional agreement . Among partners are, for instance, Plasma ResearchCenter of Tsukuba university, Hydrogen Isotope Research Center of Toyama university,
Eco Topia Science Institute of Nagoya university, and JAEA. Taking advantage of eachcollaborator, joint activities have been fruitful. The cooperation with the Tsukuba’s Plasma
Research Center, in particular, results in the achievement of successful development of theworld’s most advanced gyrotron, and generates more-than-20keV plasmas. (9)● The joint research with Shizuoka university to investigate coated boron films has reachedactual results including the finding of the influences that are caused by the quantity of
impurity contents. It is highly commended. (2)● Some of the joint activities are effectively taking advantage of participants and are worthof high scores. But others have to be reviewed and reconsidered as to whether an agreement
really has a meaning. (3)● NIFS has concluded agreements with distinguishing universities and conducted joint- 39 -

researches in the fields that partners are good at. The efforts have promoted knowledge
systematization and have enhanced intellectual and personnel resources in Japan’s
academia community. The joint work as a whole is considerably highly commended. (1)● While the coordinated activities are productive and commendable, the framework of Joint
Research (Coordinated Research) is unclear along with the presence of the General, LHD
and Bilateral Collaboration programs. (1)● Yes—for example, Tsukuba University on high-power gyrotrons, Eco Topia Institute on
atomic physics, Nagoya Institute of Technology on materials research, Shizuoka University(and JAEA) on boronization, and Univ.of Toyama on hydrogen isotopes.
● On the basis of the information provided, I got the impression that the collaboration
subjects were carefully selected. A more thorough assessment should be made by theinternal reviewers.
● Each program has its own purpose of collaboration for taking advantages of eachcollaborating institutions’ strength and interest. Therefore, it should be focused to the goalsof each collaboration program as it is initiated.
● Coordinated research based on agreement with domestic universities and institutes bringmany advantages to all partners by providing the critical mass to every narrowly focusedline of research.
3) Industry-university cooperation①Is the cooperation a productive spin-off of fusion research?
●

Cooperation in the fields of microwaves application, superconducting technology andcryogenic technology have been considerably productive in terms of industrial spin-off.
Therefore, they are highly commended. (8)● Between NIFS and private firms 14-20 coordinated researches are carried out each year,
and a total number of 25 patents were obtained during the 2005-2009 period. It suggests
industry-university cooperation has been steadily continued, which is highly commended.
(1)● Microwave heating technology has been commendably spun off. The assumption thatcrystal structures might be affected by coherent electromagnetic fields is very interesting inparticular. Industry-university cooperation does not only lead to commercialization but also
bring about an academic value. In this sense, it is highly commended. (1)● Conduction-cooling pulse coils were successfully developed for the emergency system of
SMES (Superconducting Magnetic Energy Storage) but unfortunately they failed to becommercialized. But the technology is now being targeted by those working for an
indirect-cooling system, as a prospective superconducting coil of a future reactor. Although- 40 -

it was not a perfect spinoff, what it brings back to the academic is very highly valued. (1)● The development work in fusion research is actually leading other cutting-edge
technologies. Therefore, it is expected that such advanced output will be moreprogressively applied to industry. (1)● As the NIFS website says, fusion research has enormous potential for affiliation. It is
hoped that university-industry cooperation will focus the things of high value that has an
economic potential and bring about a concrete product. (1)● I believe there are some subjects in the Domestic Collaboration which are struggled byuniversities despite developing into industry-university cooperation. I expect that NIFS will
pick up such activities and serve as a channel to connect those apart in a horizontal
relationship. (1)● Industry-university cooperation is very important and the activities currently ongoing arehighly commended. However, there have been few changes and growths in terms ofsubjects. Simulation research, for instance, may have some subjects that have an industrial
potential. New ideas are necessary to the program in order to open the door wider and toorganize cooperation that can obtain more funds from the business as well as governmental
sectors. (1)● Each year, about 14-20 such collaborations are carried out. Between 2005 and 2009, 28
patents were obtained, which is a good measure of spin-off productivity. There are threemain efforts:• Microwave ceramic sintering is an excellent example of industry collaboration.
• Low-temperature superconductivity applied for the development of protection against
power failure and voltage drop has been productive in terms of publications, conference
presentations, and one PhD thesis.
• Real-time simulation of the LHD cryogenic system has received recognition.
● It is notoriously difficult to obtain spin-offs from fusion research, mainly since the needed
technologies are highly specialized and tailored to the specific problem. Under these
difficult conditions, NIFS is doing a very good job.
● The successful results of industrial cooperation has been provided in areas such as
microwave sintering, applied superconductivity and tritium recovery, to name a few.
● The number of collaborations is impressive and grows constantly. The number of patents
is also very solid.
②Does it contribute to the local community and industries?
●

It is highly commended in that NIFS has developed the microwave technology into a
distinguished technology through tie-ups with the local business. (8)● For the training program for prospective entrepreneurs, or Kenzai-juku, organized by the- 41 -

Gifu prefecture and its industrial association, NIFS has offered support by letting them use
NIFS facilities and assisting workshop arrangement. The total number of collaborations
with local firms has reached as many as 40 during the 2004-2009 periods. These efforts arehighly commended. (2)●It is better that evaluation is made here from the perspective whether NIFS has increased
understanding of local residents about fusion science”. In this sense, the success of the
microwave-sintering technology is highly commended. (1)●NIFS handles technologies such that hold a potential of contribution to the local
community like the technology of microwave sintering. Value-added materials is expected
to be developed from now on.
● It is limited but I think contribution has been made.
● Those currently underway are making a sufficient contribution and are highly commended.
However, NIFS should define local industry more extensively and include various
businesses in and out of Gifu Prefecture. I suppose NIFS has to seek a contribution to morevarious businesses across a wide area. (1)●In particular, microwave technology has proven to be useful in the ceramics industry,
which is a major industry in the local community of NIFS. As noted above, a significant
number of patents have been obtained. Jointly with local community organizations (such as
Cera Techno Toki, the Oroshi Association, et al.), NIFS constructed six microwave hybridkiln units. These efforts have contributed to local industry and the community.

●

NIFS conducted cooperation with local industries, very actively. Especially, the ceramics
industrial collaboration in Tokai region is well received and contributed to local industries.

●

NIFS contributes to the industrial development of TOKAI region from the start of theInstitute. This activity has been amplified lately by launching about 40 collaborations
resulting in 38% increase in 5 years.
● Microwave calcinations project is of great importance because the pottery production is amajor industrial base of the TOKAI region.

- 42 -

Chapter 3 Recommendation
This chapter provides main points based on the remarks shown in the previous chapter aswell as arguments made at the NIFS External Peer Review Committee meetings. It also
provides several recommendations which are important to the target activities for future
progress.

(1)

Summary1）Domestic collaboration research
Performances and products after NIFS was reorganized as inter-university research
institute in FY2004

1 Are the application categories properly up to date?
Application categories are decided with high transparency by the Collaboration Committee
largely consisted of external staff. The categories well reflects research environments andacademic advancement thanks to the flexible and complementary relations between thethree programs of the General, LHD Project, and Bilateral collaborations. They also reflect
adequately the previous advice given by the NIFS External Peer Review Committee.
Therefore, the application categories are highly commended. Good examples can be seenin the addition of new subjects regarding engineering as well as subjects connecting theCenters to the Bilateral Collaboration.
2 Has the collaboration research progressed based on the opinions of collaborators?
Each of the three Domestic Collaboration programs established a local committee
responsible for screening and evaluating filling the majority of members with external staff.
They respect opinions from the Fusion Network properly. Besides, the BilateralCollaboration has plenty of opportunities, where views can be exchanged with the Fusion
Community. Therefore, the performance is highly commended. The joint research using
advanced simulation systems that launched in 2009 and the newly-started system ofcooperative use of diagnostic devices are a product from voices of the community. It is anotable movement.
- 43 -

3 Have the results of collaboration research been published properly?
Some hundreds of papers are published each year, and around half of them have non-NIFS
first authors. Many results obtained through the Domestic Collaboration have been picked
up at summery talks of the IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, which suggests a high level ofquality as well as quantity of the activities. Outcomes are also reported properly at thedebrief sessions and other meetings. Therefore, the performance of publication is highly
commended.
4 Has the collaboration research progressed on evaluations over the previous results?
All the three Domestic Collaboration programs require participants to present results andwrite reports, so that performance of every activity is subject to evaluation. The screening
and selection for the following year is made based on the evaluation results and then,resources are allocated properly. Responding to the previous advice given by the NIFS
Administrative Council’s External Peer Review Committee, the Bilateral Collaboration has
now make its activities exposed to the external evaluation, which is made by the
sub-committee dominated by external staff. The efforts are highly commended.
5 Are the results of the collaboration research accumulated properly as an academic
resource?
Outcomes of the NIFS’s Domestic Collaboration have been used and stored in various ways
to lay an academic foundation. This is shown by a steady increase of presentations by
non-NIFS collaborators at the IAEA Fusion Energy Conference as well as many citations
by summary talks of the conference. It can be said that the new movements among theCenters starts from the accumulated results. Therefore, the performance is highly
commended.
6 Have the circumstances for collaboration been improved?
Research conditions surrounding collaborators have been improved in terms ofaccommodation facilities, internet environments and safety management systems.
Systematic improvement is seen in the unification of services for co-researchers into the
Visitor Center (the Users Office) and the introduction of the cooperative-use system of
diagnostic devices. The efforts are highly commended.
7 Has the collaboration research helped educating students and young researchers?
- 44 -

The framework of the Domestic Collaboration provides young researchers with subjects totackle, and assists the creation of some hundreds dissertations per year. It suggests a great
contribution of the program toward development of young personnel. In this sense, theprogram is extremely highly commended.
Future direction

1 Does the plan in each category suggest a direction based on a long-term vision? Are theysatisfactory as a plan of COE of fusion research?
It is adequate to implement the plan based on a comprehensive understanding of torus
plasmas in the way which heads for a helical DEMO reactor (reactor engineering andnumerical test reactor research). The plan says the Bilateral Collaboration will extend its
framework to covering engineering issues and the coordination involving more than two
Centers is under consideration. The direction is highly commended.
2 Does the collaboration research function as a pivot for advancing new studies, such as aprogram under the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research?
New developments out of the Domestic Collaboration are observed in various places. As
many as nearly 200 subjects developed from the Domestic Collaboration have won externalfunds. As represented by the figure, the domestic project has been serving as grounding for
new explorations. It is highly commended.

2）International collaboration researchInternational collaboration research based on inter-governmental agreements

1 Has NIFS fulfilled its responsibility as an implementing agency?
NIFS has properly promoted international joint activities of Japan-US, Japan-South Korea,
Japan-China/JSPS-CAS, and the IEA. With unparalleled vigor and enthusiasm, NIFS has
fulfilled its duty as an implementing agency of international cooperation. Considering thesepoints, the performance is extremely highly commended.
2 Are the policy and plan for future collaboration satisfactory?
- 45 -

The proposed future direction is appropriate. It contains concrete proposals which takeadvantage of features of both parties. It is highly commended.
International collaboration research based on inter-institutional agreements

1 Does each program take advantage of characteristics of the agreed institutes?
Based on agreements, NIFS eagerly carries out collaborations with 15 influential foreign
institutes respectively. Every activity well utilizes features of the parties involved. The work
is highly commended.
2 Is the strategy that includes ITER and BA appropriate?
The policy that includes the conclusion of a comprehensive agreement with the ITER
Organization is appropriate and highly commended.
International collaboration research under the National Institutes for Natural Sciences

1 Is the program productive?
As part of the NINS program, NIFS promoted a sub-program called “Building theInternational Research Central Network”, and successfully enhanced internationalization ofdomestic research centers including NIFS itself. Such work is highly commended.
Voluntary contributions for other international collaboration programs (ITPA, etc)

1 Are the contributions satisfactory in terms of NIFS’s duty?
NIFS’s staff serves as members of various important groups, such as the ITER Executive
Council and the BA steering committee. NIFS also gives an academic support to the ITPA
Activity and assists university researchers through the Collaboration framework for theirinternational work. Such voluntary contribution is highly commended.

3）Joint research- 46 -

Research cooperation within the National Institutes of Natural Sciences

1 Is the cooperation productive?
NIFS plays a pivotal role in activities under the cross-cutting themes of “Imaging Science”
and “Hierarchy and Holism in Natural Science”. The activities are highly commended.
Domestic research cooperation based on inter-institutional agreements

1 Does each program take advantage of characteristics of the agreed institutes?
Joint researches have been conducted based on nine agreements with universities or
institutes in the fields of gyrotron development, tritium handling, and superconducting coils.
The activities take advantage of the characteristics of NIFS and affiliated partners.
Outcomes of the coordinated work are highly commended.
Industry-university cooperation

1 Is the cooperation a productive spin-off of fusion research?
A major achievement is the application of microwave heating technologies to industry,
which is highly commended.
2 Does it contribute to the local community and industries?
NIFS’s contribution to local industries is represented by activities like the support to the
Kenzaijuku program, which is aimed at the nurturing technical entrepreneurs of next
generations, or the involvement in a number of joint activities between private companies
in the local area. The contribution is highly commended.

- 47 -

(2)ProposalHigh marks are given to all the items about the Domestic Collaboration, the International
Collaboration as well as the Coordinated Research. This section provides important
recommendations to the programs for future activities.
1 In the Bilateral Collaboration, the inclusion of engineering subjects and the attempt tolaunch multi-Center joint collaborations will enhance the importance of this collaboration
research. Further progress on these trials is expected.
2 In order to make engineering studies more useful for development of fusion rector, thecollaboration researches toward a helical DEMO reactor in the universities have to be more
conducted under the direction of NIFS. The participation of advanced blanket into the TBM
project in ITER is expected.
3 The Domestic Collaboration requires disclosure of output, a high transparency indecision-making, and flexibility in operation to respond to the community’s voice. It issignificant for such efforts to be continued as they are.
4 The project related to numerical test reactors and the cooperative-use system of diagnostic
devices will be helpful to promote the university researches. Expansion of these systems is
expected.
5 The Japan-US cooperation is highly evaluated. NIFS will work for concluding aninter-governmental agreement and for upgrading the cooperation to a national level ofactivity. We hope the agreement to be realized.
6 A high mark is given to the policy that NIFS will increase its direct contribution to ITER
after concluding a comprehensive contract with the ITER Organization. The policy has tobe realized.
7 Under the framework of cooperation like Japan-South Korea, Japan-China as well as the
IEA, the study on fusion plasma and reactor engineering was promoted. It may be needed
for the contents of such the cooperation to be reconsidered, depending on trends in and out
of Japan.

- 48 -

Chapter 4 In closing
The NIFS External Peer Review Committee held its first meeting of the year on October 21,
2010, and determined the year’s target and relevant details including check items. At theCommittee’s second meeting, when subcommittees held their first gatherings (December 11,2010), they were given explanations by NIFS about activities. Then, reviewers made theirevaluation, and a draft report was made by section summing up the individual remarks. At
their second gathering (January 27, 2011), subcommittee members exchanged views upon
the draft summary, and a final version of the report was completed by the Committee at its
third meeting (February 23, 2011).
Regarding the Domestic Collaboration, high marks were given to NIFS’s performance since2004 regarding the given perspectives (Are the application categories properly up to date?;
Has the collaboration research progressed based on the opinions of collaborators? ; Havethe results of collaboration research been published properly?; Has the collaboration
research progressed based on evaluations over the previous results?; Are the results of thecollaboration research accumulated properly as an academic resource?; Have thecircumstances for collaboration been improved?; Has the collaboration research helped
educating students and young researchers?). High marks are also given to its future
direction (Does the plan in each category suggest a direction based on a long-term vision?
Are they satisfactory as a plan of COE of fusion research?; Does the collaboration researchfunction as a pivot for advancing new studies, such as a program under the Grants-in-Aid
for Scientific Research?).
Regarding the International Collaboration, high marks were given to the activities uponinter-governmental agreements (Has NIFS fulfilled its responsibility as an implementing
agency?; Are the policy and plan for future collaboration satisfactory?); those uponinter-institutional agreements (Does each program take advantage of characteristics of theagreed institutes?; Is the strategy that includes ITER and BA appropriate?); theNINS-initiated programs (Is the program productive?); and the voluntary contributions(Are the contributions satisfactory in terms of NIFS’s duty?).
Regarding the Joint Research, high marks were given to the coordinated activities within
the NINS framework (Is the cooperation productive?); those based on agreement withindividual institutes (Does each program take advantage of characteristics of the agreed
institutes?); and the industry-university coordinated researches (Is the cooperation a- 49 -

productive spin-off of fusion research?; Does it contribute to the local community andindustries?).
NIFS has been making a committed effort for the promotion as well as improvement ofsuch cooperative and coordinated activities. That is believed to be why NIFS could receive
high appreciations in all the given perspectives. What is highly valued in particular in thedomestic collaborations are the expansion of the Bilateral Collaboration for encompassing
engineering challenges, the road of the Domestic Collaboration heading for a DEMO
reactor, the introduction of cooperative-use system of diagnostic devices, and thepromotion of the numerical experiment project. Further progress is expected to these
activities. Regarding the International Collaboration, the ambition for a comprehensive
agreement with the ITER Organization as well as that for a government-level agreement
between Japan and the United States are highly appraised.
As seen above, NIFS’s domestic and international collaboration systems are undoubtedly
well-organized. There is no other system in the world that is as excellent as those of NIFS.
In concluding, we hope that this report will help NIFS and NIFS will continue its effort toenhance the collaborative and coordinated activities more than ever before.

- 50 -

Reference: Terminology
Broader Approach, or BA, refers to research and development of advanced
fusion conducted in parallel with ITER Project. BA is expected to support andsupplement ITER Project through its engineering research for DEMO andBA

research of the plasma physics that ITER cannot handle and other issues. BA
is based on Japan-EU cooperation, and activities are conducted at an
establishment in Naka city of Ibaraki prefecture as well as the one in
Rokkasho village of Aomori prefecture; both belonging to Japan Atomic
Energy Agency.
Before completing a fusion reactor, there are test reactors to be built. The one todemonstrate electric generation is called DEMO, and following DEMO the

DEMO

one to serve as a first electric generator is called PROTO. ITER will
demonstrate that fusion can produce energy but not that fusion energy can bechanged into electricity, so ITER is a pro-DEMO reactor.
Divertor is a device for capturing escaped plasma or unwanted impurities fromperipheral areas, and guiding them to a certain place for detainment. To do so,

Divertor

it generates an open magnetic field structure outside the closed main field toconfine plasma inside. Challenges are to remove heat from divertor plates aswell as to capture neutral particles efficiently.
Electron Bernstein wave is one of the electrostatic waves that propagate plasma

Electronnormal to the magnetic field. Its frequency is almost equal to the integral

Bernsteinmultiple of cyclotron frequency. The propagation of Electron Bernstein waves

wave(s)do not matter plasma density, so the application to high-density plasma
heating is now attempted.
Fusion Energy Conference, or FEC, is an international conference on fusion

FEC

research organized by IAEA, where results are reported in a comprehensive
way and views are exchanged over the results. The largest and mostprestigious conference of the field is held biennially.
Fusion Energy Forum of Japan is a body established to promote research andFusion Energy
Forum of Japantechnical development of fusion energy through ITER and BA efforts. The
forum is comprised by those who belong to domestic universities, institutes
and private companies, whoever hopes to join the forum.

- 51 -

Considering fusion is a comprehensive target covering a wide range of
disciplines, Fusion Network is established to connect university researchers,
Fusion Network

in a bid to develop collaborative projects based on information exchanging
and joint research. It is divided into two subjects: plasma science and reactor
engineering. NIFS takes care of administrative work for the both sections of
the network.
H-mode is a discharge mode that is very good at confining plasma, which was
discovered in a tokamak device. The mode appears when conducting

H-modehigh-power heating to plasma while keeping the amount of neutral particles
low in the edge area. The performance of the H-mode is 2-4 times better thanthat of a normal mode (L-mode).

IAEA

International Atomic Energy Agency
International Fusion Energy Research Center, or IFERC, is established in
Rokkasho Village, Aomori, as one of three BA activities. IFERC conducts
researches to help ITER as well as to realize DEMO Reactor. It contains the

IFERC

following bodies:
1. DEMO Design and R&D Coordination Center
2. ITER Remote Experimentation Center3. Computational Simulation Center
IFMIF/EVEDA is one of three BA activities expected to do Engineering

IFMIF/EVEDA

Validation and Engineering Design Activities (EVEDA) for International
Fusion Material Irradiation Facility (IFMIF). Facilities will be built andresearch will be conducted in Rokkasho Village, Aomori.

Institutional
Repository

Institutional Repository is an electric archive system for collecting, preserving
and disseminating its intellectual products (research journal articles, digital
versions of theses, bulletins and so on) of a research institute.
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, or ITER, is a tokamak
experimental establishment to seek the feasibility of fusion energy under

ITER

international cooperation. Participants are Japan, EU, Russia, USA, China,
South Korea and India. The site is in Cadarache, France. ITER is currently
under construction and operation is expected to start in 2019.
International Tokamak Physics Activity, or ITPA, is an international gathering

ITPA

to bring findings from across the world and discuss them.

ITPA is carriedout among the ITER participants, and results of helical plasmas are also
respected there as a common physics to the toroidal magnetic confinement.
- 52 -

JAEA

Japan Atomic Energy Agency
JT-60SA is one of BA activities, a project to study steady-state operation of

JT-60SA

high-performance plasmas, which ITER cannot demonstrate. It is carried out
using a superconducting device of its name, which is an upgraded version of
JT-60U, a large tokamak device at the Naka branch of JAEA.

Mirror fusion
deviceA mirror device confines plasma in a straight-line magnetic field, and curbs lossof plasma by intensifying magnetic field of the both ends. It is represented byGamma 10 of Plasma Research Center of University of Tsukuba.
PDCA cycle is a management process used in business to expedite work like

PDCA cycle

manufacturing control or quality management. Work is improved
continuously through the iterated four-step cycle of Plan, Do, Check and Act.
It stands for Q-shu Univ. Exp. with Steady-State Spherical Tokamak, an

QUEST

experimental device of Kyushu University’s Advanced Fusion ResearchCenter. The operation began in 2009.
TBM stands for Test Blanket Module. Blanket is expected to play a very
important part in a fusion reactor, taking thermal energy out of neutrons, aproduct after fusion reaction, and at the same time making the neutrons backTBM

to be fuel for the reaction, tritium, by combining them with lithium. Although
ITER does not demonstrate the process of energy generation, it will haveports to test a blanket using particles produced during the ITER experiments.
There are several types of candidate blanket, and each ITER Participant is
expected to bring modules to test its original blanket.

- 53 -

Inter-University Research Institute Corporation
National Institutes of Natural Sciences

National Institute for Fusion Science322-6 Oroshi-cho, Toki, Gifu, 509-5292, Japan

http://www.nifs.ac.jp/