2. Frequently Asked Questions¶
2.1. Why another Boltzmann solver?¶
The low-temperature plasma community already has BOLSIG+, a highly optimized, user-friendly solver for the Boltzmann equation [HP2005]. BOLSIG+ is freely distributed by its authors, Hagelaar and Pitchford. Why did I write BOLOS, another Boltzmann solver based on similar algorithms?
The simplest reply is that, as a BOLSIG+ user, I wanted to understand better what goes on beneath BOLSIG+ and the best way to understand something is to do it yourself.
However, I also felt that an Open Source implementation would benefit the community. There are a number of drawbacks to the way BOLSIG+ is packaged that sometimes limited or slowed down my own research. For example, we only have a Windows version, whereas many of us now use Linux or Mac OS X as their platforms of choice. Also, since BOLSIG+ is distributed only as binary package, it is difficult or impossible to integrate into other codes or to make it part of an automated pipeline.
Finally, there is the old hacker ethic, where we tinker with each other’s code and tools and collaborate to improve them. This is particularly relevant for scientists, since we all build on the work of others. Having an open source, modern, Boltzmann solver may facilitate new improvements and its integration with other tools.
2.2. Why did you use Python?¶
Because my main purpose was to develop a simple, readable code in the hope that other people would take it and perhaps improve it.
The code relies on the Numpy and SciPy libraries that interface with highly optimized, C or FORTRAN code.
2.3. What version(s) of Python does BOLOS support?¶
Presently, only 2.7. In future release, Python 3+ will be supported. Since BOLOS is a pure Python package, the transition should be straightforward.
2.4. Can BOLOS read cross-sections in BOLSIG+ format?¶
Yes! You can use your cross-sections files from BOLSIG+ or from LxCat without changes. Any problem reading these files will be treated as a bug.
2.5. How fast is BOLOS?¶
I would say it’s reasobaly fast. It takes a few tenths of a second to solve the Boltzmann equation. The code was heavily optimized to use numpy’s and scipy’s features, particularly regarding sparse matrices.
2.6. Are results the same as with BOLSIG+?¶
In most cases the difference in reaction rates or transport parameters is between 0.1% and 1%. My guess is that most of the difference comes from the use of different grids but probably the growth-renormalization term is implemented differently (Hagelaar and Pitchford are not very clear on this point).
Here is a comparison between nitrogen ionization rates in synthetic air as calculated by BOLOS and BOLSIG+:
You can find the complete set of comparisons for synthetic air here.
2.7. Feature X is not implemented: what can I do?¶
Yes, there are still many features that are not implemented in BOLOS. In particular, only the temporal growth model is implemented and many parameters obtained from the EEDF are not yet implemented. I hope to add these things gradually. If you are interested in a particular feature you can give it a shot: pull requests are welcome. Or you can write me and I promise that I will look into it... but you know how tight all our agendas are.
2.8. If I use BOLOS for my research, which paper should I cite?¶
BOLOS follows the algorithm described by Hagelaar and Pitchford so you should definitely cite their paper [HP2005].
There is not yet any publication associated directly with BOLOS, so if you use it please link to its source code at github.
| [HP2005] | (1, 2) *Solving the Boltzmann equation to obtain electron transport |
coefficients and rate coefficients for fluid models*, G. J. M. Hagelaar and L. C. Pitchford, Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 14 (2005) 722–733.