MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612065714 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.96.245119

Machine learning <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="double-struck">Z</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> quantum spin liquids with quasiparticle statistics

2017· article· lv· W2612065714 on OpenAlexafffund
Yi Zhang, Roger G. Melko, Eun-Ah Kim

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2017
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueIndustry CanadaCompute CanadaU.S. Department of EnergyUniversität zu KölnNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAlgorithmMachine learningPhase (matter)Topology (electrical circuits)Phase spaceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After decades of progress and effort, obtaining a phase diagram for a strongly correlated topological system still remains a challenge. Although in principle one could turn to Wilson loops and long-range entanglement, evaluating these nonlocal observables at many points in phase space can be prohibitively costly. With growing excitement over topological quantum computation comes the need for an efficient approach for obtaining topological phase diagrams. Here we turn to machine learning using quantum loop topography (QLT), a notion we have recently introduced. Specifically, we propose a construction of QLT that is sensitive to quasiparticle statistics. We then use mutual statistics between the spinons and visons to detect a ${\mathbb{Z}}_{2}$ quantum spin liquid in a multiparameter phase space. We successfully obtain the quantum phase boundary between the topological and trivial phases using a simple feed-forward neural network. Furthermore, we demonstrate advantages of our approach for the evaluation of phase diagrams relating to speed and storage. Such statistics-based machine learning of topological phases opens new efficient routes to studying topological phase diagrams in strongly correlated systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations123
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207