MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785869540 · doi:10.1063/1.5027003

Magnetic field dependent microwave losses in superconducting niobium microstrip resonators

2018· article· en· W2785869540 on OpenAlexafffund
Sangil Kwon, Anita Fadavi Roudsari, Olaf Benningshof, Yongchao Tang, Hamid Reza Mohebbi, Ivar Taminiau, Deler Langenberg, Shin-Young Lee, George Nichols, David G. Cory, Guo‐Xing Miao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of WaterlooCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundIndustry CanadaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsCondensed matter physicsQuasiparticleSuperconductivityVortexNiobiumResonatorMagnetic fieldPhysicsPenetration depthKinetic inductanceMeissner effectMicrowaveMicrostripMaterials scienceInductanceOptoelectronicsOpticsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe an experimental protocol to characterize magnetic field dependent microwave losses in superconducting niobium microstrip resonators. Our approach provides a unified view that covers two well-known magnetic field dependent loss mechanisms: quasiparticle generation and vortex motion. We find that quasiparticle generation is the dominant loss mechanism for parallel magnetic fields. For perpendicular fields, the dominant loss mechanism is vortex motion or switches from quasiparticle generation to vortex motion, depending on the cooling procedures. In particular, we introduce a plot of the quality factor versus the resonance frequency as a general method for identifying the dominant loss mechanism. We calculate the expected resonance frequency and the quality factor as a function of the magnetic field by modeling the complex resistivity. Key parameters characterizing microwave loss are estimated from comparisons of the observed and expected resonator properties. Based on these key parameters, we find a niobium resonator whose thickness is similar to its penetration depth is the best choice for X-band electron spin resonance applications. Finally, we detect partial release of the Meissner current at the vortex penetration field, suggesting that the interaction between vortices and the Meissner current near the edges is essential to understand the magnetic field dependence of the resonator properties.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207