MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043462987 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.73.052507

Comparison of the normal- and superconducting-state electromagnetic absorption in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Sr</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ru</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>

2006· article· lv· W2043462987 on OpenAlexaff
G. V. Sudhakar Rao, M. Reedyk, Naoki Kikugawa, Y. Maeno

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2006
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Condensed Matter Physics
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperconductivityPhysicsEnergy (signal processing)ReflectivityCondensed matter physicsBand gapState (computer science)Absorption (acoustics)InfraredAtomic physicsOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ratio of the far-infrared reflectance of ${\mathrm{Sr}}_{2}\mathrm{Ru}{\mathrm{O}}_{4}$ in the superconducting state ${R}_{S}$ to that in the normal state ${R}_{N}$ has been measured. For light polarized within the $ab$ plane, the superconducting state reflectance is enhanced over that of the normal state below $\ensuremath{\approx}20\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}{\mathrm{cm}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$, with the thermal reflectance ratio ${R}_{S}∕{R}_{N}$ peaking near $9\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}{\mathrm{cm}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$. The energy at which the thermal reflectance peaks, and the magnitude of its enhancement are significantly larger than expected due to the formation of a BCS energy gap. The energy scale coincides with the superconducting energy gap of ${\mathrm{Sr}}_{2}\mathrm{Ru}{\mathrm{O}}_{4}$ determined via tunneling measurements.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2300.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.239 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicAdvanced Condensed Matter PhysicsFrench-language works237,207