MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050167345 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.157001

Muon Spin Relaxation Studies of Magnetic-Field-Induced Effects in High-<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math>Superconductors

2005· article· lv· W2050167345 on OpenAlexaff
A. T. Savici, A. Fukaya, I. M. Gat-Malureanu, T. Ito, Peter L. Russo, Yohei Uemura, C. R. Wiebe, P. P. Kyriakou, G. J. MacDougall, M. T. Rovers, G. M. Luke, Kenji Kojima, Masahiro Goto, S. Uchida, R. Kadono, K. Yamada, S. Tajima, T. Masui, Hiroshi Eisaki, Nobu‐Hisa Kaneko, M. Greven, Genda Gu

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMuon spin spectroscopyMuonMagnetismPhysicsCondensed matter physicsRelaxation (psychology)DopingSpin (aerodynamics)Particle physicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muon spin relaxation measurements in high transverse magnetic fields ($\ensuremath{\parallel}\stackrel{^}{c}$) revealed strong field-induced quasistatic magnetism in the underdoped and Eu-doped $(\mathrm{La},\mathrm{Sr}{)}_{2}{\mathrm{CuO}}_{4}$ and ${\mathrm{La}}_{1.875}{\mathrm{Ba}}_{0.125}{\mathrm{CuO}}_{4}$, existing well above ${T}_{c}$ and ${T}_{N}$. The susceptibility counterpart of Cu spin polarization, derived from the muon spin relaxation rate, exhibits a divergent behavior towards $T\ensuremath{\sim}25\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{K}$. No field-induced magnetism was detected in overdoped ${\mathrm{La}}_{1.81}{\mathrm{Sr}}_{0.19}{\mathrm{CuO}}_{4}$, optimally doped Bi2212, and Zn-doped ${\mathrm{YBa}}_{2}{\mathrm{Cu}}_{3}{\mathrm{O}}_{7}$.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations60
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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