MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantum phase transitions in the Kondo-necklace model: perturbative continuous unitary transformation approach

2015· article· en· W2034684978 on OpenAlexaff
Shayan Hemmatiyan, M. Rahimi Movassagh, Nader Ghassemi, Mehdi Kargarian, A. T. Rezakhani, A. Langari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsUnitary transformationPhysicsQuantum phase transitionQuantum entanglementQuantum mechanicsQuantum critical pointSpin (aerodynamics)Thermodynamic limitQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Kondo-necklace model can describe magnetic low-energy limit of strongly correlated heavy fermion materials. There exist multiple energy scales in this model corresponding to each phase of the system. Here, we study quantum phase transition between the Kondo-singlet phase and the antiferromagnetic long-range ordered phase, and show the effect of anisotropies in terms of quantum information properties and vanishing energy gap. We employ the 'perturbative continuous unitary transformations' approach to calculate the energy gap and spin-spin correlations for the model in the thermodynamic limit of one, two, and three spatial dimensions as well as for spin ladders. In particular, we show that the method, although being perturbative, can predict the expected quantum critical point, where the gap of low-energy spectrum vanishes, which is in good agreement with results of other numerical and Green's function analyses. In addition, we employ concurrence, a bipartite entanglement measure, to study the criticality of the model. Absence of singularities in the derivative of concurrence in two and three dimensions in the Kondo-necklace model shows that this model features multipartite entanglement. We also discuss crossover from the one-dimensional to the two-dimensional model via the ladder structure.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Condensed MatterSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207