MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077899295 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.84.224435

General quantum fidelity susceptibilities for the<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>-<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>chain

2011· article· lv· W2077899295 on OpenAlexaff
Mischa Thesberg, Erik S. Sørensen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2011
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntiferromagnetismQuantum phase transitionPhysicsPhase diagramPhase transitionQuantum critical pointHeisenberg modelCondensed matter physicsPhase (matter)Quantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study slightly generalized quantum fidelity susceptibilities where the differential change in the fidelity is measured with respect to a different term than the one used for driving the system toward a quantum phase transition. As a model system we use the spin-$1/2$ ${J}_{1}$-${J}_{2}$ antiferromagnetic Heisenberg chain. For this model, we study three fidelity susceptibilities, ${\ensuremath{\chi}}_{\ensuremath{\rho}}$, ${\ensuremath{\chi}}_{D}$, and ${\ensuremath{\chi}}_{\mathrm{AF}}$, which are related to the spin stiffness, the dimer order, and antiferromagnetic order, respectively. All these ground-state fidelity susceptibilities are sensitive to the phase diagram of the ${J}_{1}$-${J}_{2}$ model. We show that they all can accurately identify a quantum critical point in this model occurring at ${J}_{2}^{c}\ensuremath{\sim}0.241{J}_{1}$ between a gapless Heisenberg phase for ${J}_{2}&lt;{J}_{2}^{c}$ and a dimerized phase for ${J}_{2}&gt;{J}_{2}^{c}$. This phase transition, in the Berezinskii-Kosterlitz-Thouless universality class, is controlled by a marginal operator and is therefore particularly difficult to observe.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.006

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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