MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281061730 · doi:10.4208/cicp.oa-2016-0020

Computing Optimal Interfacial Structure of Modulated Phases

2016· article· en· W2281061730 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

VenueCommunications in Computational Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicBlock Copolymer Self-Assembly
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaxima and minimaInterface (matter)Orientation (vector space)Position (finance)Boundary (topology)Basis (linear algebra)Energy landscapePhase (matter)Chemical physicsEnergy (signal processing)Computer scienceMaterials scienceSurface (topology)Topology (electrical circuits)Biological systemStatistical physicsPhysicsGeometryMathematicsMoleculeMathematical analysisThermodynamicsQuantum mechanicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a general framework of computing interfacial structures between two modulated phases. Specifically we propose to use a computational box consisting of two half spaces, each occupied by a modulated phase with given position and orientation. The boundary conditions and basis functions are chosen to be commensurate with the bulk phases. We observe that the ordered nature of modulated structures stabilizes the interface, which enables us to obtain optimal interfacial structures by searching local minima of the free energy landscape. The framework is applied to the Landau-Brazovskii model to investigate interfaces between modulated phases with different relative positions and orientations. Several types of novel complex interfacial structures emerge from the calculations.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.286 · 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