Observation of magnetic supercooling of the transition to the vortex state
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The magnetic hysteresis of an individual magnetic disc switching in and out of the vortex state has been exhaustively measured using nanomechanical torsional resonator torque magnetometry. Each individual hysteresis loop pinpoints two sharp events, a single vortex creation and an annihilation, with a bias field precision of 0.02 kA m -1 . Statistical analysis of thousands of hysteresis loops reveals a dramatic difference in the sensitivity of the vortex creation and annihilation field distributions to the measurement conditions. The data sets measured at different magnetic field sweep rates demonstrate that the transition from the high-field state to the vortex state is not well modeled as a conventional thermal activation process in which it is assumed that the 'true' nucleation field is lower than any of the observed switching fields. Instead, the results are suggestive of the classic supercooling signature of a first-order phase transition, or more specifically here, its magnetic equivalent. This phenomenological evidence is consistent with a theoretical picture of the vortex nucleation process as a modified Landau first-order phase transition. Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Experiment and results 3 3. Conclusions 9
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".