MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1871232910 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.71.155111

Minimally self-consistent T-matrix approximation to describe the low-temperature properties of the Hubbard model in the atomic limit

2005· article· en· W1871232910 on OpenAlexaff
Simona Verga, R. J. Gooding, F. Marsiglio

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairingPhysicsLimit (mathematics)Formalism (music)Hubbard modelSelf consistentInstabilityStatistical physicsConsistency (knowledge bases)Coupling (piping)Matrix (chemical analysis)Quantum mechanicsMathematical physicsQuantum electrodynamicsMathematicsChemistryMathematical analysisMaterials scienceDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The atomic limit of the Hubbard model is a simple single-site problem which can be solved exactly, and all one- and two-particle Green's functions can be obtained analytically. These solutions can thus serve as a means of critiquing the success of various approximate theories which might be applied to the full Hubbard model. In particular, we have examined the $T$-matrix approximation for the attractive Hubbard model in the atomic limit, which should give reasonable results at low electronic densities, if one can avoid the spurious phase transition that results when a fully non-self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation is employed---previously we have shown that any level of self-consistency guarantees that this phase transition is correctly suppressed to zero temperature in two dimensions or less. Here, a minimally self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation is shown to be successful in reproducing the exact results for the atomic limit, while fully self-consistent $T$-matrix results do not agree with the known solutions. Of particular note is that the minimally self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation reproduces not only one- and two-particle (static) thermodynamic quantities, but it also exactly reproduces the one-particle spectral function at low but nonzero temperatures. We also make a comparison to the two-particle self-consistent approach of Vilk and Tremblay, and find that the minimally self-consistent $T$-matrix theory can give better results over a broader temperature range.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207