MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064529294 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.82.035105

Witten effect in a crystalline topological insulator

2010· article· en· W2064529294 on OpenAlexaff
G. Rosenberg, Marcel Franz

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic monopolePhysicsAxionMagnetismCharge (physics)Topological insulatorTopology (electrical circuits)Coupling (piping)Electric chargeQuantum mechanicsParticle physicsCombinatoricsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been noted a long time ago that a term of the form $\ensuremath{\theta}({e}^{2}/2\ensuremath{\pi}h)\mathbf{B}\ensuremath{\cdot}\mathbf{E}$ may be added to the standard Maxwell Lagrangian without modifying the familiar laws of electricity and magnetism. $\ensuremath{\theta}$ is known to particle physicists as the ``axion'' field and whether or not it has a nonzero expectation value in vacuum remains a fundamental open question of the standard model. A key manifestation of the axion term is the Witten effect: a unit magnetic monopole placed inside a medium with $\ensuremath{\theta}\ensuremath{\ne}0$ is predicted to bind a (generally fractional) electric charge $\ensuremath{-}e(\ensuremath{\theta}/2\ensuremath{\pi}+n)$ with $n$ integer. Here we conduct a test of the Witten effect based on the recently established fact that the axion term with $\ensuremath{\theta}=\ensuremath{\pi}$ emerges naturally in the description of the electromagnetic response of a class of crystalline solids called topological insulators---materials distinguished by strong spin-orbit coupling and nontrivial band structures. Using a simple physical model for a topological insulator we demonstrate the existence of a fractional charge bound to a monopole by an explicit numerical calculation. We also propose a scheme for generating an ``artificial'' magnetic monopole in a topological insulator film that may be used to facilitate an experimental test of Witten's prediction.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 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

Citations135
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207