MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041460288 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.75.233102

Direct probe of electronic nematic order: Symmetry information in scanning tunneling microscope images

2007· article· en· W2041460288 on OpenAlexafffund
Hyeonjin Doh, Hae‐Young Kee

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsLiquid crystalScanning tunneling microscopeCondensed matter physicsIsotropyPhysicsAnisotropyPhase transitionLocal density of statesMaterials scienceTranslational symmetryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An electronic nematic state spontaneously breaks a point-group symmetry of an underlying lattice. As a result, the nematic-isotropic transition accompanies a Fermi surface distortion. However, the anisotropic nature of the nematic state at a macroscopic scale can be easily wiped out when domains of different orientations of nematic order exist. We suggest that a spatial pattern of local density of states (LDOS) in the presence of a nonmagnetic impurity can be a direct probe of the nematic order. We study various patterns of LDOS across the quantum phase transition between the isotropic and nematic phases. Specifically, the Fourier transformed local density of states, which can be deduced from scanning tunneling microscope images, represents a transparent symmetry of an electronic structure. The application of our results to the bilayer ruthenate, ${\mathrm{Sr}}_{3}{\mathrm{Ru}}_{2}{\mathrm{O}}_{7}$, is also discussed.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207