Skip to content

Compute validation financing

SCPN Control has the software infrastructure for bounded fusion-control experiments: formal Petri-net safety checks, differentiable physics surfaces, neural transport and equilibrium surrogates, digital-twin update contracts, quantum disruption facades, and strict evidence admission gates. The remaining step is not a claim-writing exercise. It is a compute, data, and validation campaign.

We are seeking support for GPU time, storage, public-data processing, external code comparisons, and documented validation artefacts. The goal is to convert implemented research infrastructure into reproducible evidence that can be reviewed, repeated, and challenged.

Claim boundary

Funding supports validation work. It does not by itself create facility deployment evidence, safety approval, or quantitative public claims. SCPN Control keeps full-fidelity claims blocked until the corresponding external artefacts pass the repository admission gates.

Current support request

The immediate need is funding and collaboration for validation, not marketing language. The prepared lanes need public-data acquisition, GPU execution, external-code comparisons, target-hardware timing, and independent review. The repository already records blockers as evidence gates; financing pays to run the campaigns that can close those gates or produce useful negative evidence.

Why compute financing matters

The repository already separates bounded local evidence from external validation requirements. That discipline is useful, but it also makes the bottleneck clear: several high-value physics surfaces need large public datasets, repeated GPU campaigns, and external solver comparisons before they can support broader claims.

Current blockers include:

Validation lane What is needed Why financing helps
Neural transport QLKNN/QuaLiKiz tensors, preprocessing, training, holdout reports Public payloads are hundreds of GB before processed tensors and repeats
Differentiable physics JAX transport/equilibrium gradient campaigns and latency evidence GPU runs make end-to-end gradient validation practical
Gyrokinetic comparison Real TGLF, GENE, GS2, CGYRO, or QuaLiKiz artefacts for identical cases External-code runs require compute, executable access, and evidence packaging
Neural equilibrium Synthetic pretraining plus EFIT/P-EFIT reference comparison Real reconstruction artefacts and repeated training runs are required
Digital twin TRANSP/TSC or equivalent integrated-modelling evidence External simulator artefacts must be converted into strict admission reports
Disruption prediction Measured multi-facility databases and baseline comparisons Synthetic benchmarks do not replace measured disruption evidence

Active public-data acquisition

The current public acquisition lane targets QLKNN and QuaLiKiz data hosted on Zenodo. The repository stores normalised acquisition manifests; the large tensor payloads are downloaded into a local data workspace rather than committed to git.

Dataset DOI Files Payload size
QLKNN10D training set 10.5281/zenodo.3497066 5 32,080,102,848 bytes
QuaLiKiz v2.6.2 JET spectra 10.5281/zenodo.7418108 1 29,655,790,232 bytes
QLKNN11D training set 10.5281/zenodo.8017522 46 247,952,755,894 bytes
Total 52 309,688,648,974 bytes

These downloads are necessary for neural-transport training and validation, but they are not sufficient by themselves. After acquisition, the next steps are checksum verification, format inspection, preprocessing, feature/target schema binding, train/validation/test splits, model training, holdout prediction, and strict reference-artifact admission.

GPU and storage budget tiers

The estimates below are planning budgets. They are intentionally expressed as GPU-hours and storage rather than vendor-specific prices, because cloud rates and local hardware availability change.

Tier Compute Storage What it unlocks
Local validation start 100-300 GPU-h on one 24 GB GPU 1-2 TB QLKNN10D preprocessing, compact surrogate retraining, JAX smoke campaigns, neural-equilibrium synthetic pretraining
External-evidence campaign 1,000-3,000 GPU-h on A100/H100-class GPUs 4-8 TB QLKNN11D training runs, QuaLiKiz holdout validation, differentiable transport/equilibrium reports, digital-twin surrogate campaigns
Publication-grade campaign 5,000-20,000 GPU-h on multi-GPU A100/H100-class systems 10-30 TB Multi-seed training, uncertainty sweeps, nonlinear GK campaigns, end-to-end differentiable control evidence, repeatable benchmark tables

CPU/HPC resources are also needed. Formal verification is mostly CPU/RAM-bound, and external tools such as TRANSP, TSC, TGLF, GENE, GS2, CGYRO, and QuaLiKiz may require CPU clusters, facility licences, or code-specific runtime environments.

Prepared neural-equilibrium campaign budget

The MAST EFM neural-equilibrium dataset is prepared on ML350 SAS and can be checked without launching long training jobs:

python validation/plan_neural_equilibrium_training_campaign.py --require-sas-payload --verified-sas-payload

The generated reports validation/reports/neural_equilibrium_training_campaign_plan.json and validation/reports/neural_equilibrium_training_campaign_plan.md record the prepared MAST EFM payload, deferred QLKNN/QuaLiKiz public-data lane, external EFIT/P-EFIT dataset requirements, and GPU-hour estimates. Current planning budgets are:

Scenario Minimum GPU-h Nominal GPU-h Upper GPU-h Storage
MAST EFM readiness smoke 0 1 3 0.05 TB
MAST EFM single-seed full-output trainer 2 6 12 0.1 TB
MAST EFM multi-seed ablation and uncertainty 30 80 180 0.5 TB
QLKNN/QuaLiKiz payload processing and baseline training 100 350 900 2 TB
External EFIT/P-EFIT or DIII-D equilibrium set 20 120 400 1 TB
Publication-grade equilibrium campaign 500 1,500 4,000 4 TB

These are estimates for planning and financing. They are not benchmark claims. The MAST EFM dataset is prepared, but predictive EFIT/P-EFIT admission remains blocked until a full-output trainer and strict holdout admission artefacts exist. The launch path is also dry-run prepared through validation/train_mast_efm_neural_equilibrium.py; long training requires an explicit --execute flag and must run only on this workstation or external cloud compute after storage access and GPU capacity are reserved. ML350 is a storage host for this lane, not a training machine. ML350 dry-run evidence now confirms the prepared MAST EFM SAS dataset is visible from the storage host. The current supervised dataset has no fallback feature columns: Ip_MA derives from public plasma_current_x, Bt_T derives from public bphi_rmag, and ffprime_scale derives from public ffprime profile RMS magnitude normalised by the campaign median. The remaining no-compute blocker has moved from feature provenance to execution evidence: long training must be launched with explicit --execute on workstation or cloud compute, then compact holdout metrics and strict reference-admission artefacts must be published. The compute execution package is now prepared in the campaign report: it fixes the expected dataset SHA-256, keeps default weights under artifacts/neural_equilibrium/, declares ML350 as a forbidden training host, requires workstation or external_cloud host admission, and points to repository-published templates for holdout metrics, latency metrics, GPU-cost accounting, and the final admission certificate.

What support pays for

Funding is used for concrete, auditable work products:

  • Public dataset acquisition with size and checksum verification.
  • Reproducible preprocessing scripts and immutable processed-data manifests.
  • GPU training runs with pinned seeds, hardware metadata, and holdout reports.
  • External-code comparison artefacts with input decks, raw outputs, parsed outputs, units, tolerances, and SHA-256 digests.
  • Hardware timing evidence for control-relevant latency budgets.
  • Documentation that keeps bounded evidence separate from facility claims.
  • Issue-linked validation reports that reviewers can inspect without trusting unpublished assertions.

Evidence produced by a funded campaign

A successful campaign should produce repository artefacts such as:

Artefact Purpose
public_data_acquisition_report.json Shows which public files were acquired and verified
neural_transport_reference reports Binds QLKNN/QuaLiKiz reference tensors, weights, predictions, units, and metrics
jax_gk_parity reports Shows CPU/GPU parity for selected native JAX gyrokinetic cases
gk_crosscode reports Compares native outputs against real external-code runs
digital_twin_reference reports Binds TRANSP/TSC or equivalent integrated-modelling evidence
physics_traceability reports Shows which claims remain blocked and which have admitted evidence

Every admitted artefact should be schema-versioned, digest-bound, and tied to the claim it supports. This makes the funding result useful even when a campaign finds disagreement: a failed validation run is still actionable evidence.

Support the validation campaign

SCPN Control is developed as research infrastructure. Compute sponsorship, cloud credits, hardware access, facility-data collaboration, external-code run artefacts, and direct financing all help move the project from bounded local evidence toward broader public validation.

If you can support the campaign, use the sponsor link in the repository README or contact protoscience@anulum.li with the resource you can provide:

  • GPU or HPC credits.
  • Storage for public and processed datasets.
  • Access to real shot data with a clear data policy.
  • External-code runs for matched validation cases.
  • Review of validation reports and claim boundaries.
  • Direct financing for compute, data engineering, and documentation work.

Current priority order

  1. Finish QLKNN/QuaLiKiz public-payload acquisition and checksum verification.
  2. Build processed neural-transport datasets with immutable manifests.
  3. Train and validate QLKNN-class neural transport surrogates against holdout data.
  4. Run JAX differentiable transport and equilibrium gradient campaigns.
  5. Package external-code and facility-data artefacts into strict admission reports as collaborators provide them.

The public page will be updated as new evidence is admitted. Until then, the claim boundary remains explicit: support funds the validation campaign; the validation campaign must earn the claims.