Abstract:Particle-in-Cell (PIC) codes are a popular tool to model laser-plasma interactions. Many different PIC codes already exist, and many new PIC codes are being developed constantly. It is therefore important to compare different PIC codes to ascertain which code is best suited for a particular kind of physical problem. In a paper by Smith et al. (2021) they compared three different codes on a problem relating to proton acceleration in the Target Normal Sheath Acceleration regime from a normal incidence ultra-intense laser pulse. Smith et al. (2021) included in their study the widely used EPOCH code. However, they did not include results from the Smilei code, which is another popular PIC code in the plasma community with a variety of features and physics packages. In the present work, we compare the Smilei code to the EPOCH code for the same test case as Smith et al. (2021). Broadly we find the two codes to be highly consistent with agreement in total ion, electron, and field energy at a percent level or better. The electron and ion energy distribution functions agree well at lower energies and the differences at higher energies (e.g. because of the finite number of macroparticles) are similar to what Smith et al. (2021) saw for other codes. We found that Smilei consumed 25% more RAM than EPOCH did but the execution time was 30% less for Smilei on one processor. We include the input files to encourage future comparisons.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is: to compare the performance of two commonly - used particle - simulation codes (Particle - in - Cell, PIC) - EPOCH and Smilei in the problem of ion acceleration, especially in the interaction between ultrashort and ultra - intense laser pulses and plasma under the Target Normal Sheath Acceleration (TNSA) mechanism. Specifically, the author hopes to evaluate the consistency and differences between these two codes in terms of simulated physical quantity prediction and computational performance (such as memory usage and execution time). ### Research Background Particle - simulation codes (PIC) are important tools for simulating laser - plasma interactions. As more and more PIC codes are developed, the comparison between different codes becomes particularly important to determine which code is most suitable for a specific type of physical problem. Previous studies (such as the study by Smith et al. in 2021) have compared the performance of multiple PIC codes in proton acceleration, but these studies did not include the Smilei code. Therefore, this study aims to fill this gap and further verify the performance of these two codes under the TNSA mechanism by directly comparing Smilei with EPOCH. ### Research Method The author used the same input files and parameter settings as Smith et al. (2021) to conduct simulation experiments in a 2D3v geometric structure. The simulation settings include a hydrogen plasma target with a density of \( n_d = 5 \cdot n_{\text{crit}} \), where \( n_{\text{crit}}=\frac{\epsilon_0 m_e \omega^2}{e^2} \) is the non - relativistic critical density, the laser wavelength is 800 nm, the laser intensity is \( 10^{20}\,\text{W/cm}^2 \), the FWHM is 3 µm, and the corresponding normalized vector potential \( a_0=\frac{e E_0}{m_e \omega c} = 6.8 \). ### Main Findings 1. **Consistency in Physical Quantity Prediction**: - The evolution of the total electron energy, total ion energy, and electromagnetic field energy over time shows a high degree of consistency between the two codes, with an error within 1%. - The energy distribution functions of electrons and ions (EEDF and IEDF) are very consistent in the low - energy part, but there are some differences in the high - energy tail, which are mainly due to statistical fluctuations caused by the limited number of macro - particles. 2. **Performance and Memory Consumption**: - Smilei is about 30% faster than EPOCH when running on a single core, but the memory usage increases by about 25%. - When OpenMP is enabled, the memory usage of Smilei increases significantly, but the performance improvement is not obvious. ### Conclusion In general, EPOCH and Smilei show highly consistent results in this study, especially in terms of physical quantity prediction. Although there are some minor differences in the high - energy tail, this is within the expected range and is consistent with the comparison results of other PIC codes before. In terms of performance, Smilei is faster on a single core but requires more memory. For users with more memory resources, Smilei may be a better choice because it can further improve the speed by taking advantage of parallel computing. However, the final choice should be determined according to the specific physical problem and the available computing resources.

Particle-In-Cell Code Comparison for Ion Acceleration: EPOCH and Smilei

A Particle-In-Cell Code Comparison for Ion Acceleration: EPOCH, LSP, and WarpX

Smilei : A collaborative, open-source, multi-purpose particle-in-cell code for plasma simulation

A Comparative Study on the Acceleration Techniques for Solving Finite Difference Discretization Poisson's Equation in the PIC/MCC Method

QuickPIC: a highly efficient fully parallelized PIC code for plasma-based acceleration

Integrating a ponderomotive guiding center algorithm into a quasi-static particle-in-cell code based on azimuthal mode decomposition

Modeling of Ionization Physics with the PIC Code OSIRIS

A quasi-static particle-in-cell algorithm based on an azimuthal Fourier decomposition for highly efficient simulations of plasma-based acceleration: QPAD

Particle-in-cell Simulation of Transport and Energy Deposition of Intense Proton Beams in Solid-State Materials

Implementation of a Mesh refinement algorithm into the quasi-static PIC code QuickPIC

Modeling Laser Wake Field Acceleration with the Quasi-Static PIC Code QuickPIC

Fast Particle-in-Cell simulations-based method for the optimisation of a laser-plasma electron injector

Characterizing the Performance of the Implicit Massively Parallel Particle-in-Cell iPIC3D Code

PIC-MC Code to Model Fast Electron Beam Transport Through Dense Matter

eduPIC: an introductory particle based code for radio-frequency plasma simulation

Load management strategy for Particle-In-Cell simulations in high energy particle acceleration

Kinetic, 3-D, PIC-DSMC Simulations of Ion Thruster Plumes and the Backflow Region

JefiPIC: A 3-D Full Electromagnetic Particle-in-Cell Simulator Based on Jefimenko's Equations on GPU

PIFE-PIC: Parallel Immersed-Finite-Element Particle-In-Cell For 3-D Kinetic Simulations of Plasma-Material Interactions

Relativistic reference frame PIC simulations for electron beam dynamics with meter-scale propagation inside plasma and under external fields

CBETor: a hybrid-kinetic particle-in-cell code for cross-beam energy transfer simulation