MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747991507 · doi:10.1142/s0218271817501759

Exponential nonlinear electrodynamics and backreaction effects on holographic superconductor in the Lifshitz black hole background

2017· article· en· W2747991507 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Modern Physics D · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlack hole (networking)AdS black holeBack-reactionCritical phenomenaSuperconductivityNonlinear systemExponential functionHolographyMagnetic fieldScalar field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analytically describe the properties of the s-wave holographic superconductor with the exponential nonlinear electrodynamics in the Lifshitz black hole background in four-dimensions. Employing an assumption the scalar and gauge fields backreact on the background geometry, we calculate the critical temperature as well as the condensation operator. Based on Sturm–Liouville method, we show that the critical temperature decreases with increasing exponential nonlinear electrodynamics and Lifshitz dynamical exponent, [Formula: see text], indicating that condensation becomes difficult. Also we find that the effects of backreaction has a more important role on the critical temperature and condensation operator in small values of Lifshitz dynamical exponent, while [Formula: see text] is around one. In addition, the properties of the upper critical magnetic field in Lifshitz black hole background using Sturm–Liouville approach is investigated to describe the phase diagram of the corresponding holographic superconductor in the probe limit. We observe that the critical magnetic field decreases with increasing Lifshitz dynamical exponent, [Formula: see text], and it goes to zero at critical temperature, independent of the Lifshitz dynamical exponent, [Formula: see text].

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 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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Modern Physics DSame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207