MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804949061 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.98.094501

Spontaneous edge current in higher chirality superconductors

2018· article· en· W2804949061 on OpenAlexafffund
Xin Wang, Zhiqiang Wang, Catherine Kallin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Condensed Matter Physics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsSuperconductivityCondensed matter physicsPhysicsPairingSurface finishLattice (music)Inversion (geology)Point reflectionChirality (physics)Surface roughnessQuantum mechanicsMaterials scienceChiral symmetryQuantum chromodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of finite temperature, Meissner screening, and surface roughness on the spontaneous edge current for higher chirality quasi-two-dimensional superconductors are studied in the continuum limit using the quasiclassical Eilenberger equations. We find that the total spontaneous current is nonzero at finite temperature $T$ and maximized near $T={T}_{c}/2$, where ${T}_{c}$ is the transition temperature, although it vanishes at $T=0$. In the presence of surface roughness, we observe a surface current inversion in the chiral $d$-wave case that can be understood in terms of a disorder-induced $s$-wave pairing component in the rough surface regime. This conclusion is supported by a Ginzburg-Landau analysis. However, this current inversion is nonuniversal beyond the continuum limit, as demonstrated by self-consistent lattice Bogoliubov-de Gennes calculations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicAdvanced Condensed Matter PhysicsFrench-language works237,207