MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009149499 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.89.205113

Coherent control of optical injection of spin and currents in topological insulators

2014· article· en· W2009149499 on OpenAlexaff
Rodrigo A. Muniz, J. E. Sipe

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopological insulatorSpin (aerodynamics)Coherent controlPhysicsControl (management)Topology (electrical circuits)Condensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringComputer scienceLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Topological insulators have surface states with a remarkable helical spin structure, with promising prospects for applications in spintronics. Strategies for generating spin-polarized currents, such as the use of magnetic contacts and photoinjection, have been the focus of extensive research. While several optical methods for injecting currents have been explored, they have all focused on one-photon absorption. Here we consider the use of both a fundamental optical field and its second harmonic, which allows the injection of spin-polarized carriers and current by a nonlinear process involving quantum interference between one- and two-photon absorption. General expressions are derived for the injection rates in a generic two-band system, including those for one- and two-photon absorption processes as well as their interference. Results are given for carrier, spin density, and current injection rates on the surface of topological insulators, for both linearly and circularly polarized light. We identify the conditions that would be necessary for experimentally verifying these predictions.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations33
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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