MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Coexistence of Midgap Antiferromagnetic and Mott States in Undoped, Hole- and Electron-Doped Ambipolar Cuprates

2016· article· en· W2376717172 on OpenAlexaff
Xinmao Yin, Shengwei Zeng, Tanmoy Das, G. Baskaran, Teguh Citra Asmara, Iman Santoso, Xiaojiang Yu, Caozheng Diao, Ping Yang, Mark B. H. Breese, T. Venkatesan, Hsin Lin, Ariando Ariando, Andrivo Rusydi

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersMinistry of EnvironmentFédération pour la Recherche sur le CerveauNational Research Foundation SingaporeNational University of Singapore
KeywordsAntiferromagnetismCondensed matter physicsCuprateAmbipolar diffusionElectronic correlationDopingSuperconductivityPhysicsElectronMott transitionMaterials scienceHubbard modelQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the first observation of the coexistence of a distinct midgap state and a Mott state in undoped and their evolution in electron and hole-doped ambipolar Y_{0.38}La_{0.62}(Ba_{0.82}La_{0.18})_{2}Cu_{3}O_{y} films using spectroscopic ellipsometry and x-ray absorption spectroscopies at the O K and Cu L_{3,2} edges. Supported by theoretical calculations, the midgap state is shown to originate from antiferromagnetic correlation. Surprisingly, while the magnetic state collapses and its correlation strength weakens with dopings, the Mott state in contrast moves toward a higher energy and its correlation strength increases. Our result provides important clues to the mechanism of electronic correlation strengths and superconductivity in cuprates.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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