The upper critical magnetic field of holographic superconductor with conformally invariant Power–Maxwell electrodynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The properties of (d–1)-dimensional s-wave holographic superconductor in the presence of Power–Maxwell field is explored. We study the probe limit in which the scalar and gauge fields do not backreact on the background geometry. Our study is based on the matching of solutions on the boundary and on the horizon at some intermediate point. At first, the case without external magnetic field is considered, and the critical temperature is obtained in terms of the charge density, the dimensionality, and the Power–Maxwell exponent. Then, a magnetic field is turned on in the d-dimensional bulk, which can influence the (d–1)-dimensional holographic superconductor at the boundary. The phase behavior of the corresponding holographic superconductor is obtained by computing the upper critical magnetic field in the presence of Power–Maxwell electrodynamics, characterized by the power exponent q. Interestingly, it is observed that in the presence of a magnetic field, the physically acceptable phase behavior of the holographic superconductor is obtained for q = d/4, which guaranties the conformal invariance of the Power–Maxwell Lagrangian. The case of physical interest in five space–time dimensions (d = 5, and q = 5/4) is considered in detail, and compared with the results obtained for the usual Maxwell electrodynamics q = 1 in the same dimensions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".