MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1835687610 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.91.201404

Optimal control of Majorana zero modes

2015· article· en· W1835687610 on OpenAlexafffund
Torsten Karzig, Armin Rahmani, Felix von Oppen, Gil Refael

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchU.S. Department of EnergyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMAJORANAAdiabatic processLimit (mathematics)PhysicsZero (linguistics)QuantumProtocol (science)Motion (physics)Quantum mechanicsTheoretical physicsTopology (electrical circuits)Classical mechanicsMathematicsSuperconductivityMathematical analysisCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Requirement of adiabaticity in the process of braiding of Majorana modes presents serious challenges to its practical implementation. The authors explore how to minimize nonadiabatic errors for finite braiding times by finding an optimal protocol for the Majorana movement. They show, counterintuitively, that protocols characterized by sharp transitions between Majorana motion at maximal and minimal velocities may do the trick.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations56
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207