MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084078223 · doi:10.1088/0034-4885/71/6/062501

Two gaps make a high-temperature superconductor?

2008· article· en· W2084078223 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReports on Progress in Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPseudogapPairingSuperconductivitySuperconducting coherence lengthCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)CrossoverElectron pairMeasure (data warehouse)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the keys to the high-temperature superconductivity puzzle is the identification of the energy scales associated with the emergence of a coherent condensate of superconducting electron pairs. These might provide a measure of the pairing strength and of the coherence of the superfluid, and ultimately reveal the nature of the elusive pairing mechanism in the superconducting cuprates. To this end, a great deal of effort has been devoted to investigating the connection between the superconducting transition temperature Tc and the normal-state pseudogap crossover temperature T*. Here we present a review of a large body of experimental data that suggests a coexisting two-gap scenario, i.e. superconducting gap and pseudogap, over the whole superconducting dome.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.245 · 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