MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616932521 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.96.085114

Absorption of circular polarized light in tilted type-I and type-II Weyl semimetals

2017· article· en· W2616932521 on OpenAlexafffund
Soumya Mukherjee, J. P. Ćarbotte

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsType (biology)Absorption (acoustics)Circular polarizationPhysicsCondensed matter physicsOpticsMaterials scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We calculate the ac optical response to circularly polarized light of a Weyl semimetal (WSM) with varying amounts of tilt of the Dirac cones. Both type-I and -II (overtilted) WSMs are considered in a continuum model with broken time-reversal symmetry. The Weyl nodes appear in pairs of equal energies but of opposite momentum and chirality. For type I, the response of a particular node to right-hand polarized (RHP) and left-hand polarized (LHP) light is distinct only in a limited range of photon energy $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}, \frac{2}{1+{C}_{2}/v}<\frac{\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Omega}}}{\ensuremath{\mu}}<\frac{2}{1\ensuremath{-}{C}_{2}/v}$ with $\ensuremath{\mu}$ the chemical potential and ${C}_{2}$ the tilt associated with the positive chirality node assuming the two nodes are oppositely tilted. For the overtilted case (type II), the same lower bound applies but there is no upper bound. If the tilt is reversed, the RHP and LHP responses are also reversed. We present corresponding results for the Hall angle.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.338 · 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.

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

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207