MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091049224 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.88.257002

Spin–1 Neutron Resonance Peak Cannot Account for Electronic Anomalies in the Cuprate Superconductors

2002· article· en· W2091049224 on OpenAlexaff
Hae‐Young Kee, Steven A. Kivelson, G. Aeppli

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCupratePairingPhysicsCondensed matter physicsSuperconductivitySpin (aerodynamics)Resonance (particle physics)Neutron scatteringCoupling (piping)ScatteringInelastic neutron scatteringElectronNeutronBosonAbsorption (acoustics)Atomic physicsNuclear physicsMaterials scienceQuantum mechanicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In certain cuprates, a spin-1 resonance mode is prominent in the magnetic structure measured by neutron scattering. It has been proposed that this mode is responsible for significant features seen in other spectroscopies, such as photoemission and optical absorption, which are sensitive to the charge dynamics, and even that this mode is the boson responsible for "mediating" the superconducting pairing. We show that its small (measured) intensity and weak coupling to electron-hole pairs (as deduced from the measured lifetime) disqualifies the resonant mode from either proposed role.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations89
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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