← All problems

Problem

Buildable, MHD-stable quasi-isodynamic stellarator

Stellarators confine plasma with externally shaped 3D magnetic fields, avoiding tokamak disruptions, but the plasma boundary and coils must be optimized jointly for confinement (quasi-isodynamicity), ideal-MHD stability at reactor pressure, and coils that can actually be manufactured. Every stellarator power-plant company (Proxima, Type One, Thea, Renaissance) depends on finding such configurations cheaply, so better optimizers directly shorten design cycles worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Proxima's public ConStellaration benchmark operationalizes the stage-one part: the original mhd_stable track requires log10(qi) <= -3.5 and vacuum_well >= 0, plus bounds on edge rotational transform per field period, edge mirror ratio and flux compression in bad-curvature regions, scored by the compactness vs coil-simplicity Pareto front (hypervolume) against classical baselines. Fully SOLVED means a configuration meeting those physics constraints at reactor-relevant beta with a coil set satisfying stated engineering limits (bend radius, clearance for blanket/shielding, peak field), ultimately validated in hardware.

Funding

$1.03B

Raised by the 4 companies working on it, 1 undisclosed.

Prize money for solving it$0
Open competition pools$0

Why it is still open

Paper designs claiming all reactor requirements simultaneously now exist (e.g. Proxima's Stellaris, CIEMAT-QI4X), but no reactor-relevant QI stellarator with HTS coils has been built; Proxima's first hardware de-risking step, the Stellarator Model Coil, is scheduled for 2027. On the benchmark side the ConStellaration mhd_stable track had only 6 submitter labels and 42 result rows as of 2026-09-21, and recent literature notes pressure-driven instabilities persist in QI configurations, limiting access to high power density.

Source: proximafusion.com

Who is working on it

Proxima Fusion$740M Designs the Stellaris QI stellarator power plant with HTS coils, runs the ConStellaration ML benchmark, and is building the Stellarator Model Coil (2027) ahead of the Alpha demonstration stellarator. InvestorsXTX Ventures, East X Ventures, RWE, Google, Cherry Ventures, Balderton Capital, SPRIND, Lightspeed
Type One Energy$160M Building the Infinity One stellarator and designing Infinity Two, a ~350 MWe stellarator plant with TVA; DOE Milestone program awardee. InvestorsBreakthrough Energy Ventures, Doral Energy-Tech Ventures, TDK Ventures, US DOE Milestone-Based Fusion Development Program
Thea Energy$130M Replaces complex modular stellarator coils with computer-controlled arrays of planar HTS coils (Eos, Helios pilot plant); first DOE Milestone awardee to pass preconceptual design review (Jan 2026). InvestorsU.S. Innovative Technology Fund, Prelude Ventures, Lowercarbon Capital, Hitachi Ventures, Anglo American, Idemitsu Kosan, Linse Capital
Renaissance Fusionundisclosed Stellarator with wide HTS-tape coils wound on a cylinder and engraved into 3D current paths, plus liquid-metal walls; building a demonstrator of the basic components. InvestorsCredit Mutuel Impact (Revolution Environnementale et Solidaire fund), Lowercarbon Capital

Prizes

What counts as solved

The acceptance condition, stated in Lean 4. Measurements a computer cannot produce on its own are named inputs, supplied by whoever attests them.

import Mathlib

/-!
# Buildable, MHD-stable quasi-isodynamic (QI) stellarator

Acceptance predicate modelled on the ConStellaration benchmark (Proxima Fusion /
Hugging Face), "MHD-stable QI" track: a fixed-boundary plasma shape that is
quasi-isodynamic, compact, not too elongated, has a vacuum magnetic well and
limited flux compression in bad curvature, scored on coil simplicity.

Formalized concretely: the candidate object (stellarator-symmetric Fourier boundary),
the constraint set, the scalarized objective threshold, and a monotone rung family.

Opaque oracle (`Evaluator`): the ideal-MHD equilibrium solve (VMEC++ in the benchmark)
and every derived figure of merit. Lean does not compute any of them. The attester is
whoever runs the pinned evaluator version on the submitted boundary (benchmark
maintainers or an agreed third party); a board must pin evaluator version + resolution.

Units: boundary coefficients in metres; all figures of merit dimensionless.
QI residual is compared on log10 scale as in the benchmark. The default numbers in
`benchmarkLimits` are indicative of the published track and must be re-checked against
the pinned release before money moves.
-/

namespace OpenSpur.Problems.StellaratorQiMhd

/-- Stellarator-symmetric boundary: (m, n, R_mn cosine, Z_mn sine), metres. -/
structure Boundary where
  fieldPeriods : ℕ
  modes : List (ℕ × ℤ × ℝ × ℝ)

/-- Outputs of the pinned equilibrium + metrics pipeline (oracle, not verified). -/
structure Evaluator where
  /-- equilibrium solve converged at pinned resolution and the surface is non-self-intersecting -/
  converged : Boundary → Prop
  log10QiResidual : Boundary → ℝ
  aspectRatio : Boundary → ℝ
  maxElongation : Boundary → ℝ
  /-- edge rotational transform divided by number of field periods -/
  edgeIotaPerPeriod : Boundary → ℝ
  mirrorRatio : Boundary → ℝ
  /-- vacuum magnetic well depth; > 0 means a well (favourable for interchange) -/
  vacuumWell : Boundary → ℝ
  /-- flux compression in regions of bad curvature (benchmark proxy) -/
  fluxCompression : Boundary → ℝ
  /-- normalized minimum magnetic-gradient scale length L_∇B (coil-simplicity proxy; larger is simpler) -/
  gradScaleLength : Boundary → ℝ

structure Limits where
  maxLog10Qi : ℝ
  maxAspect : ℝ
  maxElongation : ℝ
  minEdgeIotaPerPeriod : ℝ
  maxMirror : ℝ
  maxFluxCompression : ℝ
  /-- required coil-simplicity objective -/
  minGradScaleLength : ℝ

/-- Indicative thresholds (re-verify against the pinned ConStellaration release). -/
def benchmarkLimits : Limits where
  maxLog10Qi := -3.5
  maxAspect := 10
  maxElongation := 5
  minEdgeIotaPerPeriod := 0.25
  maxMirror := 0.25
  maxFluxCompression := 0.9
  minGradScaleLength := 1

/-- Feasibility for the MHD-stable QI track. Vacuum well is strictly positive. -/
def Feasible (E : Evaluator) (L : Limits) (b : Boundary) : Prop :=
  E.converged b ∧
  E.log10QiResidual b ≤ L.maxLog10Qi ∧
  E.aspectRatio b ≤ L.maxAspect ∧
  E.maxElongation b ≤ L.maxElongation ∧
  L.minEdgeIotaPerPeriod ≤ E.edgeIotaPerPeriod b ∧
  E.mirrorRatio b ≤ L.maxMirror ∧
  0 < E.vacuumWell b ∧
  E.fluxCompression b ≤ L.maxFluxCompression

/-- SOLVED: a feasible boundary that also meets the coil-simplicity target. -/
def Solved (E : Evaluator) (L : Limits) (b : Boundary) : Prop :=
  Feasible E L b ∧ L.minGradScaleLength ≤ E.gradScaleLength b

/-- Rung k: QI tolerance tightens by 0.25 decades and L_∇B target rises by 0.1 per rung. -/
noncomputable def rung (L : Limits) (k : ℕ) : Limits :=
  { L with maxLog10Qi := L.maxLog10Qi - (k : ℝ) / 4,
           minGradScaleLength := L.minGradScaleLength + (k : ℝ) / 10 }

/-- Solving a higher rung implies solving any lower rung (same evaluator). -/
theorem rung_mono (E : Evaluator) (L : Limits) (b : Boundary) {j k : ℕ} (hjk : j ≤ k)
    (h : Solved E (rung L k) b) : Solved E (rung L j) b := by
  have hc : (j : ℝ) ≤ k := by exact_mod_cast hjk
  obtain ⟨⟨h0, hqi, hrest⟩, hg⟩ := h
  refine ⟨⟨h0, ?_, hrest⟩, ?_⟩
  · simp only [rung] at hqi ⊢; linarith
  · simp only [rung] at hg ⊢; linarith

end OpenSpur.Problems.StellaratorQiMhd

Public resources

Join

Tell us what you want settled.

Two questions. We read every one.

I am a

What are you looking to solve?

Where should we reply?

Received

That is with us.

We read every message and reply to the ones we can help.