MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1163751998 · doi:10.1090/crmp/027/08

Some mathematical problems in the Ginzburg-Landau theory of superconductivity

2001· book-chapter· en· W1163751998 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen J. Gustafson

Bibliographic record

VenueCRM proceedings & lecture notes · 2001
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
Canadian institutionsBibliothèque et Archives nationales du QuébecUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSuperconductivityGinzburg–Landau theoryLandau theoryCondensed matter physicsTheoretical physicsPhysicsStatistical physicsPhase transition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In agreement with the Landau theory of phase transitions, a superconductor is described macroscopically by the Ginzburg-Landau equations (1950).These are nonlinear partial differential equations for a cornplex-valued function.ii, (the order parameter), and a vector-field -4 (the vector potential).The equations contain a parame ter. A. which determines whet her t hey describe a superconductor of the first kind ( A < l ) , or of the second kind ( A > 1).It was observed by Abrikosov (1957) that a highly-symmetric family of solutions known as n-vortices plays a central role in the theory.These solutions are classified by their integer topological degree, n E Z.The principal goal of this thesis is to establish the stability properties of the n-vortex.The stability question is studied for three types of evolution equations: a gradient flow, a nonlinear wave equation, and a nonlinear Schrodinger equation.Our main result determines the dependence of the stability of nvortices on the topological degree, n, and on the parameter, A. Specifically, we prove that for X < 1, al1 vortices are stable, while for X > 1, n-vortices are stable if n = rtl and unstable if jnl 2 2. Previous work on vortex sta-bility (Taubes (1980), Stuart (1994)) has focussed on the special case X = 1, in which the Ginzbug-Landau equations reduce to the kst-order Bogomolnyi equations.In particular, our result resolves a long-standing conjecture: first rigorously formulated by Jaffe and Taubes (1980).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCRM proceedings & lecture notesSame topicAdvanced Thermodynamics and Statistical MechanicsFrench-language works237,207