MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evidence for a Magnetically Driven Superconducting<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math>Phase of<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi>CeCoIn</mml:mi><mml:mn>5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>

2010· article· lv· W2320943639 on OpenAlexaff
M. Kenzelmann, Simon Gerber, N. Egetenmeyer, J. L. Gavilano, Th. Strässle, A. Bianchi, E. Ressouche, R. Movshovich, E. D. Bauer, J. L. Sarrao, J. D. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRare-earth and actinide compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de Pointe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperconductivityPhysicsOrder (exchange)Spin (aerodynamics)Condensed matter physicsPhase (matter)Wave functionQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have studied the magnetic order inside the superconducting phase of CeCoIn5 for fields along the [1 0 0] crystallographic direction using neutron diffraction. We find a spin-density wave order with an incommensurate modulation Q=(q,q,1/2) and q=0.45(1), which within our experimental uncertainty is indistinguishable from the spin-density wave found for fields applied along [1 -1 0]. The magnetic order is thus modulated along the lines of nodes of the d{x{2}-y{2}} superconducting order parameter, suggesting that it is driven by the electron nesting along the superconducting line nodes. We postulate that the onset of magnetic order leads to reconstruction of the superconducting gap function and a magnetically induced pair density wave.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.282
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations102
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicRare-earth and actinide compoundsFrench-language works237,207