MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1681262245 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.98.037203

Specific Heat of the Dilute Ising Magnet<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>LiHo</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Y</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">F</mml:mi><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>

2007· article· lv· W1681262245 on OpenAlexaff
J. A. Quilliam, Chas Mugford, Ariel Gómez, S. Kycia, J. B. Kycia

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsIsing modelStatistical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present specific heat data on three samples of the dilute Ising magnet LiHoxY1-xF4 with x=0.018, 0.045, and 0.080. Previous measurements of the ac susceptibility of an x=0.045 sample showed the Ho3+ moments to remain dynamic down to very low temperatures, and the specific heat was found to have unusually sharp features. In contrast, our measurements do not exhibit these sharp features in the specific heat and instead show a broad feature, for all three samples studied, which is qualitatively consistent with a spin glass state. Integrating C/T, however, reveals an increase in residual entropy with lower Ho concentration, consistent with recent Monte Carlo simulations showing a lack of spin glass transition for low x.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207