MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

From Birefringent Electrons to a Marginal or Non-Fermi Liquid of Relativistic Spin-<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math> Fermions: An Emergent Superuniversality

2018· article· lv· W2890188133 on OpenAlexafffund
Bitan Roy, Malcolm P. Kennett, Kun Yang, Vladimir Juričić

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsFermionQuasiparticleSpin (aerodynamics)Fermi liquid theoryCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsElectronSuperconductivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the quantum critical theory of an interacting nodal Fermi liquid of quasirelativistic pseudospin-3/2 fermions that have a noninteracting birefringent spectrum with two distinct Fermi velocities. When such quasiparticles interact with gapless bosonic degrees of freedom that mediate either the long-range Coulomb interaction or its short range component (responsible for spontaneous symmetry breaking), in the deep infrared or quantum critical regime in two dimensions, the system is, respectively, described by a marginal- or a non-Fermi liquid of relativistic spin-1/2 fermions (possessing a unique velocity), and is always a marginal Fermi liquid in three dimensions. We consider a possible generalization of these scenarios to fermions with an arbitrary half-odd-integer spin, and conjecture that critical spin-1/2 excitations represent a superuniversal description of the entire family of interacting quasirelativistic fermions.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.253 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207