MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032525535 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.71.054501

Properties of the superconducting state in a two-band model

2005· article· en· W2032525535 on OpenAlexaff
E. J. Nicol, J. P. Ćarbotte

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSuperconductivity in MgB2 and Alloys
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperconductivityCondensed matter physicsDimensionless quantityPhysicsAnisotropyPenetration depthJumpLondon penetration depthCoupling (piping)Band gapDiagonalBCS theoryCoupling parameterScatteringQuantum mechanicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eliashberg theory is used to investigate the range of thermodynamic properties possible within a two-band model for $s$-wave superconductivity and to identify signatures of its two-band nature. We emphasize dimensionless BCS ratios [those for the energy gaps, the specific heat jump, and the negative of its slope near ${T}_{c}$, the thermodynamic critical field ${H}_{c}(0)$, and the normalized slopes of the critical field and the penetration depth near ${T}_{c}$], which are no longer universal even in weak coupling. We also give results for temperature-dependent quantities, such as the penetration depth and the energy gap. Results are presented both for microscopic parameters appropriate to ${\mathrm{MgB}}_{2}$ and for variations away from these. Strong coupling corrections are identified and found to be significant. Analytic formulas are provided that show the role played by the anisotropy in coupling in some special limits. Particular emphasis is placed on small interband coupling and on the opposite limit of no diagonal coupling. The effect of impurity scattering is considered, particularly for the interband case.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.317
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations137
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicSuperconductivity in MgB2 and AlloysFrench-language works237,207