Determining the Surface-To-Bulk Progression in the Normal-State Electronic Structure of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>Sr</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>RuO</mml:mi><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>by Angle-Resolved Photoemission and Density Functional Theory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We revisit the normal-state electronic structure of Sr(2)RuO(4) by angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy with improved data quality, as well as ab initio band structure calculations in the local-density approximation with the inclusion of spin-orbit coupling. We find that the current model of a single surface layer (√2×√2)R45° reconstruction does not explain all detected features. The observed depth-dependent signal degradation, together with the close quantitative agreement with the slab calculations based on the surface crystal structure as determined by low-energy electron diffraction, reveal that-at a minimum-the subsurface layer also undergoes a similar although weaker reconstruction. This model accounts for all features-a key step in understanding the electronic structure-and indicates a surface-to-bulk progression of the electronic states driven by structural instabilities. Finally, we find no evidence for other phases stemming from either topological bulk properties or, alternatively, the interplay between spin-orbit coupling and the broken symmetry of the surface.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it