MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2272799845 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.93.245404

Approaching a topological phase transition in Majorana nanowires

2016· article· en· W2272799845 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ryan V. Mishmash, David Aasen, Andrew Higginbotham, Jason Alicea

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDivision of Materials ResearchInstitute for Quantum Information and Matter, California Institute of TechnologyCalifornia Institute of TechnologyAspen Center for PhysicsGordon and Betty Moore FoundationAlfred P. Sloan FoundationWalter Burke Institute for Theoretical PhysicsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMAJORANAPhysicsPhase transitionSuperconductivityExcited stateCondensed matter physicsTopology (electrical circuits)ScalingPhase (matter)Quantum tunnellingTopological orderCoupling (piping)Quantum mechanicsMaterials scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent experiments have produced mounting evidence of Majorana zero modes in nanowire-superconductor hybrids. Signatures of an expected topological phase transition accompanying the onset of these modes nevertheless remain elusive. We investigate a fundamental question concerning this issue: Do well-formed Majorana modes necessarily entail a sharp phase transition in these setups? Assuming reasonable parameters, we argue that finite-size effects can dramatically smooth this putative transition into a crossover, even in systems large enough to support well-localized Majorana modes. We propose overcoming such finite-size effects by examining the behavior of low-lying excited states through tunneling spectroscopy. In particular, the excited-state energies exhibit characteristic field and density dependence, and scaling with system size, that expose an approaching topological phase transition. We suggest several experiments for extracting the predicted behavior. As a useful byproduct, the protocols also allow one to measure the wire's spin-orbit coupling directly in its superconducting environment.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 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

Citations56
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207