MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2279911340 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.93.174414

<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mi>SU</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>chiral edge modes of a critical spin liquid

2016· article· lv· W2279911340 on OpenAlexaff
Didier Poilblanc, Norbert Schuch, Ian Affleck

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2016
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPhase (matter)CrystallographyMathematical physicsCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protected chiral edge modes are a well-known signature of topologically ordered phases, such as the fractional quantum Hall states (FQHS). Using the framework of projected entangled pair states (PEPS) on the square lattice, the authors construct a family of chiral spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ quantum spin liquids with ${\mathbb{Z}}_{2}$ gauge symmetry and analyze in full detail the properties of the edge modes. Surprisingly, the results show that the latter can be well described by a chiral conformal field theory of free bosons (SU(2)${}_{1}$), as is the case for the $\ensuremath{\nu}$=$\frac{1}{2}$ (bosonic) gapped Laughlin state, despite the fact that the numerical data here suggest a critical bulk. The authors thus propose that our family of PEPS physically describes a boundary between a chiral topological phase and a trivial phase and might be closely connected to an (unknown) analogous FQHS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6700.466

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations45
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207