MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034044679 · doi:10.1088/1361-648x/ab9b51

Electron scattering in a superlattice of line defects on the surface of topological insulators

2020· article· en· W3034044679 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScatteringImage warpingSuperlatticeTopological insulatorElectronLine (geometry)Electron scatteringSurface states

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electron scattering from periodic line defects on the surface of topological insulators with hexagonal warping effect is investigated theoretically by means of a transfer matrix method. The influence of surface line defects, acting as structural ripples on propagation of electrons are studied in two perpendicular directions due to the asymmetry of warped energy contour under momentum exchange. The transmission profiles and the details of resonant peaks which vary with the number of defects and the strength of their potentials are strongly dependent on the direction in which the line defects extend. At low energies, the quantum interference between the incident and reflected propagating electrons has the dominant contribution in transmission resonances, while at high energies the multiple scattering processes on the constant-energy contour also appear because of the strong warping effect. By increasing the spatial separation between the line defects, the minimum value of electrical conductance remains significantly high at low incident energies, while the minimum value may approach zero at high energies as the number of defects is increased. Our findings suggest that the potential ripples on the surface of topological insulators can be utilized to control the local electronic properties of these materials.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Condensed MatterSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207