MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981311889 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.71.045120

Electronic Raman scattering in correlated materials: A treatment of nonresonant, mixed, and resonant scattering using dynamical mean-field theory

2005· article· en· W1981311889 on OpenAlexaff
A. M. Shvaika, O. Vorobyov, J. K. Freericks, Thomas Devereaux

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsRaman scatteringPhotonResonance (particle physics)ScatteringMott insulatorCondensed matter physicsLattice (music)Atomic physicsRaman spectroscopyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We solve for the electronic Raman scattering response functions on an infinite-dimensional hypercubic lattice employing dynamical mean-field theory. This contribution extends previous work on the nonresonant response to include the mixed and resonant contributions. We focus our attention on the infinite-dimensional spinless Falicov-Kimball model, where the problem can be solved exactly, and the system can be tuned to go through a Mott-Hubbard-like metal-insulator transition. Resonant effects vary in different scattering geometries, corresponding to the symmetries of the charge excitations scattered by the light. We do find that the Raman response is large near the double resonance, where the transfered frequency is close to the incident photon frequency. We also find a joint resonance of both the charge-transfer peak and the low-energy peak when the incident photon frequency is on the order of the interaction strength. In general, the resonance effects can create order of magnitude (or more) enhancements of features in the nonresonant response, especially when the incident photon frequency is somewhat larger than the frequency of the nonresonant feature. Finally, we find that the resonant effects also exhibit isosbestic behavior, even in the ${A}_{1\mathrm{g}}$ and ${B}_{2\mathrm{g}}$ sectors, and it is most prominent when the incident photon frequency is on the order of the interaction energy.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
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 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

Citations34
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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