MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002821365 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.97.046402

Mott Transition, Antiferromagnetism, and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:math>-Wave Superconductivity in Two-Dimensional Organic Conductors

2006· article· en· W2002821365 on OpenAlex
Bumsoo Kyung, A.–M. S. Tremblay

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicOrganic and Molecular Conductors Research
Canadian institutionsRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de PointeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntiferromagnetismSuperconductivityMott insulatorPhase diagramCondensed matter physicsPhysicsHubbard modelOrder (exchange)Metal–insulator transitionPhase (matter)Electrical resistivity and conductivityQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the Mott transition, antiferromagnetism, and superconductivity in layered organic conductors using the cellular dynamical mean-field theory for the frustrated Hubbard model. A $d$-wave superconducting phase appears between an antiferromagnetic insulator and a metal for ${t}^{\ensuremath{'}}/t=0.3--0.7$ or between a nonmagnetic Mott insulator (spin liquid) and a metal for ${t}^{\ensuremath{'}}/t\ensuremath{\ge}0.8$, in agreement with experiments on layered organic conductors including $\ensuremath{\kappa}\mathrm{\text{\ensuremath{-}}}(\mathrm{ET}{)}_{2}{\mathrm{Cu}}_{2}(\mathrm{CN}{)}_{3}$. These phases are separated by a strong first-order transition. The phase diagram gives much insight into the mechanism for $d$-wave superconductivity. Two predictions are made.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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