MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556472615 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.92.214422

On the equivalence of models with similar low-energy quasiparticles

2015· article· en· W2556472615 on OpenAlexafffund
Mirko Möller, Mona Berciu

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsQuasiparticlePseudogapPhenomenology (philosophy)PhysicsCondensed matter physicsFerromagnetismEquivalence (formal languages)AntiferromagnetismStatistical physicsMathematicsSuperconductivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use a Metropolis algorithm to calculate the finite temperature spectral weight of three related models that have identical quasiparticles at $T=0$, if the exchange favors the appearance of a ferromagnetic background. The low-energy behavior of two of the models remains equivalent at finite temperature, however that of the third does not because its low-energy behavior is controlled by rare events due to thermal fluctuations, which transfer spectral weight well below the $T=0$ quasiparticle peaks and generate a pseudogaplike phenomenology. Our results demonstrate that having $T=0$ spectra with similar quasiparticles is not a sufficient condition to ensure that two models are equivalent, i.e., that their low-energy properties are similar. We also argue that the pseudogaplike phenomenology is quite generic for models of $t\ensuremath{-}J$ type, appearing in any dimension and for carriers injected into both ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic backgrounds.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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