Pseudogap transition within the superconducting phase in the three-band Hubbard model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The onset of the pseudogap in high-${T}_{c}$ superconducting cuprates (HTSC) is marked by the ${T}^{*}$ line in the doping-temperature phase diagram, which ends at a point ${p}^{*}$ at zero temperature within the superconducting dome. Although various theoretical and experimental studies indicate a competition between the pseudogap and superconductivity, there is no general consensus on the effects of the pseudogap within the superconducting phase. We use cluster dynamical mean-field theory on a three-band Hubbard model for the HTSC to study the superconducting phase at $T=0$, obtained when doping the charge-transfer insulator, for several values of $U$. We observe a first-order transition within the superconducting phase, which separates the underdoped and overdoped solutions. The transition to the underdoped solution is marked by a discontinuous increase in the spectral gap, and on further underdoping the spectral gap increases while the superconducting order parameter decreases. We conclude that this is due to the onset of the pseudogap in the underdoped region, which contributes to the increasing spectral gap; this is further consistent with the appearance of a pole in the normal component of the self-energy, in the antinodal region, in the underdoped solution. This is accompanied by a change in the source of the condensation energy from potential energy, in the overdoped region, to kinetic energy in the underdoped region. Further, we also observe that the $d$-wave node vanishes smoothly within the superconducting phase at low values of hole doping, within the underdoped region. We see this as a manifestation of Mott physics operating at very low doping. Various aspects of the results and their implications are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".