Observation of signatures of subresolution defects in two-dimensional superconductors with a scanning SQUID
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diamagnetic susceptibility of a superconductor is directly related to its superfluid density. Mutual inductance is a highly sensitive method for characterizing thin films, however, in traditional mutual inductance measurements, the measured response is a nontrivial average over the area of the mutual inductance coils, which are typically of millimeter size. Here we measure localized, isolated features in the diamagnetic susceptibility of Nb superconducting thin films with lithographically defined through holes, $\ensuremath{\delta}$-doped ${\mathrm{SrTiO}}_{3}$, and the two-dimensional electron system at the interface between ${\mathrm{LaAlO}}_{3}$ and ${\mathrm{SrTiO}}_{3}$, using scanning superconducting quantum interference device susceptometry, with spatial resolution as fine as $0.7\phantom{\rule{0.28em}{0ex}}\ensuremath{\mu}\mathrm{m}$. We show that these features can be modeled as locally suppressed superfluid density, with a single parameter that characterizes the strength of each feature. This method provides a systematic means of finding and quantifying submicron defects in two-dimensional superconductors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".