MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074301097 · doi:10.1063/1.3590148

Vortex penetration and flux relaxation with arbitrary initial conditions in non-ideal and ideal superconductors

2011· article· en· W2074301097 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVortexSuperconductivityPenetration depthFlux (metallurgy)Field (mathematics)Penetration (warfare)Magnetic flux

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vortex penetration and flux relaxation phenomena carry information about the pinning ability, and consequently current-carrying ability, of a type-II superconductor. However, the theoretical descriptions of these phenomena are currently limited to the cases with special initial conditions. A generalization to the recently developed infinite series models is presented here. It is shown that one can convert a vortex penetration process with a nonzero initial internal field into a process with a zero initial internal field by introducing some time parameters. Similarly, one can also convert a flux relaxation process starting with an arbitrary internal field into a process starting with a melting internal field by introducing a virtual time interval. Therefore, one can predict the melting internal field (or critical current density) from a flux relaxation process starting with a lower internal field. Finally, I show that the vortex penetration process in an ideal superconductor is strongly time dependent because of the surface barrier and internal field repulsive force. But the flux relaxation process does not occur in the ideal superconductor.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207