Broken symmetry<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math>quantum Hall states in bilayer graphene: Landau level mixing and dynamical screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For bilayer graphene in a magnetic field at the neutral point, we derive and solve a full set of gap equations including all Landau levels and taking into account the dynamically screened Coulomb interaction. There are two types of the solutions for the filling factor $\ensuremath{\nu}=0$: (i) a spin-polarized type solution, which is the ground state at small values of perpendicular electric field ${E}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}$, and (ii) a layer-polarized solution, which is the ground state at large values of ${E}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}$. The critical value of ${E}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}$ that determines the transition point is a linear function of the magnetic field, i.e., ${E}_{\ensuremath{\perp},\mathrm{cr}}={E}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{\mathrm{off}}+aB$, where ${E}_{\ensuremath{\perp}}^{\mathrm{off}}$ is the offset electric field and $a$ is the slope. The offset electric field and energy gaps substantially increase with the inclusion of dynamical screening compared to the case of static screening. The obtained values for the offset and the energy gaps are comparable with experimental ones. The interaction with dynamical screening can be strong enough for reordering the levels in the quasiparticle spectrum (the $n=2$ Landau level sinks below the $n=0$ and $n=1$ ones).
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".