MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964813080 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.100.075104

Dielectric and electronic properties of three-dimensional Luttinger semimetals with a quadratic band touching

2019· article· en· W2964813080 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Tchoumakov, William Witczak‐Krempa

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de PointeUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCondensed matter physicsQuasiparticleRandom phase approximationPhysicsQuadratic equationSemimetalCoulombDielectricWave functionCoupling (piping)Quantum mechanicsQuantum electrodynamicsMaterials scienceBand gapSuperconductivityElectronMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to strong spin-orbit coupling, charge carriers in three-dimensionsal quadratic-band-touching Luttinger semimetals have nontrivial wave functions characterized by a pseudospin of 3/2. We compute the dielectric permittivity of such semimetals at finite doping, within the random phase approximation. Because of interband coupling, the dielectric screening shows a reduced plasma frequency and an increased spectral weight at small wave vectors compared to a regular quadratic band. This weakens the effective Coulomb potential, modifying the single-particle self-energy for which we present both analytical and numerical results. At a low carrier density, the quasiparticle properties of this model strongly deviate from that of a single quadratic band. We compare our findings with experimental results for $\ensuremath{\alpha}$-Sn, HgSe, HgTe, YPtBi, and ${\mathrm{Pr}}_{2}{\mathrm{Ir}}_{2}{\mathrm{O}}_{7}$.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207