Spin versus charge noise from Kondo traps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic and charge noise have a common microscopic origin in solid-state devices, as described by a universal electron trap model. In spite of this common origin, magnetic (spin) and charge noise spectral densities display remarkably different behaviors when many-particle correlations are taken into account, leading to the emergence of the Kondo effect. We derive exact frequency sum rules for trap noise and perform numerical renormalization-group calculations to show that while spin noise is a universal function of the Kondo temperature, charge noise remains well described by single-particle theory even when the trap is deep in the Kondo regime. We obtain simple analytical expressions for charge and spin noise that account for Kondo screening in all frequency and temperature regimes, enabling the study of the impact of disorder and the emergence of magnetic $1/f$ noise from Kondo traps. We conclude that the difference between charge and spin noise survives even in the presence of disorder, showing that noise can be more manageable in devices that are sensitive to magnetic (rather than charge) fluctuations and that the signature of the Kondo effect can be observed in spin noise spectroscopy experiments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".