MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamical Signatures of Quasiparticle Interactions in Quantum Spin Chains

2020· article· en· W3031561442 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Keselman, Leon Balents, Oleg A. Starykh

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersGordon and Betty Moore FoundationKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSpinonPhysicsCondensed matter physicsAntiferromagnetismBound stateZeeman effectQuasiparticleQuantum mechanicsSpin (aerodynamics)MagnonMagnetic fieldFerromagnetismSuperconductivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the transverse dynamical susceptibility of an antiferromagnetic spin-1/2 chain in the presence of a longitudinal Zeeman field. In the low magnetization regime in the gapless phase, we show that the marginally irrelevant backscattering interaction between the spinons creates a nonzero gap between two branches of excitations at small momentum. We further demonstrate how this gap varies upon introducing a second neighbor antiferromagnetic interaction, vanishing in the limit of a noninteracting "spinon gas." In the high magnetization regime, as the Zeeman field approaches the saturation value, we uncover the appearance of two-magnon bound states in the transverse susceptibility. This bound state feature generalizes the one arising from string states in the Bethe ansatz solution of the integrable case. Our results are based on numerically accurate, unbiased matrix-product-state techniques as well as analytic approximations.

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207