MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080493275 · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.12.3.090

Random quench predicts universal properties of amorphous solids

2022· article· en· W3080493275 on OpenAlexaff
Masanari Shimada, Eric DeGiuli

Bibliographic record

VenueSciPost Physics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Dynamics and Properties
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsObservableAmorphous solidStatistical physicsMesoscale meteorologyDimension (graph theory)Quenching (fluorescence)ModuliMean field theoryField (mathematics)PhysicsElastic modulusMaterials scienceCondensed matter physicsThermodynamicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsChemistryCrystallography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amorphous solids display numerous universal features in their mechanics, structure, and response. Current models assume heterogeneity in mesoscale elastic properties, but require fine-tuning in order to quantitatively explain vibrational properties. A complete model should derive the magnitude and character of elastic heterogeneity from an initially structureless medium, through a model of the quenching process during which the temperature is rapidly lowered and the solid is formed. Here we propose a field-theoretic model of a quench, and compute structural, mechanical, and vibrational observables in arbitrary dimension d. This allows us to relate the properties of the amorphous solid to those of the initial medium, and to those of the quench. We show that previous mean-field results are subsumed by our analysis and unify spatial fluctuations of elastic moduli, long-range correlations of inherent state stress, universal vibrational anomalies, and localized modes into one picture.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSciPost PhysicsSame topicMaterial Dynamics and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207