MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effective model for the electronic and optical properties of stanene

2017· article· en· W2624078799 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Gómez de Salazar, Rodrigo A. Muniz, J. E. Sipe

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Materials · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectronic structureElectronic band structureElectronMaterials scienceCondensed matter physicsBand gapLattice (music)Image warpingPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existence of several two-dimensional (2D) materials with heavy atoms has recently been demonstrated. The electronic and optical properties of these materials can be accurately computed with numerically intensive density-functional theory methods. However, it is desirable to have simple effective models that can accurately describe these properties at low energies. Here we present an effective model for stanene that is reliable for electronic and optical properties for photon energies up to 1.1 eV. For this material, we find that a quadratic model with respect to the lattice momentum is the best suited for calculations based on the band structure, even with respect to band warping. We also find that splitting the two spin-$\stackrel{\ifmmode \hat{}\else \^{}\fi{}}{\mathbf{z}}$ subsectors is a good approximation, which indicates that the lattice buckling can be neglected in calculations based on the band structure. We illustrate the applicability of the model by computing the linear optical injection rates of carrier and spin densities in stanene. Our calculations indicate that an incident circularly polarized optical field only excites electrons with spin that matches its helicity.

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)0.001
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review MaterialsSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207