MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089250749 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.73.184507

Inversion techniques for optical conductivity data

2006· article· en· W2089250749 on OpenAlexaff
E. Schachinger, Danilo R. Neuber, J. P. Ćarbotte

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConductivityInversion (geology)Optical conductivitySuperconductivityPhononOmegaElectronPhysicsCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical data is encoded with information on the microscopic interaction between charge carriers. For an electron-phonon system, the Eliashberg equations apply and a Kubo formula can be used to get the infrared conductivity. The task of extracting the electron-phonon spectral density ${\ensuremath{\alpha}}^{2}F(\ensuremath{\omega})$ from data is rather complicated and, thus, simplified but approximate expressions for the conductivity have often been used. We test the accuracy of such simplifications and also discuss the advantages and disadvantages of various numerical methods needed in the inversion process. Normal and superconducting states are considered as well as boson exchange mechanisms which might be applicable to the high-${T}_{c}$ oxides.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations64
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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