Magnetic order and competition with superconductivity in (Ho-Er)Ni<sub>2</sub>B<sub>2</sub>C
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The rare earth magnetic order in pure and doped Ho (1− x ) Er x Ni 2 B 2 C (x = 0, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1) single crystal samples was investigated using magnetization and neutron diffraction measurements. Superconducting quaternary borocarbides, R Ni 2 B 2 C where R = Ho, Er , are magnetic intermetallic superconductors with the transition temperatures ∼10 K in which long range magnetic order develops in the same temperature range and competes with superconductivity. Depending on the rare earth composition the coupling between superconductivity and magnetism creates several phases, ranging from a near reentrant superconductor with a mixture of commensurate and incommensurate antiferromagnetism to an incommensurate antiferromagnetic spin modulation with a weak ferromagnetic component. All of these phases coexist with superconductivity. RKKY magnetic interactions are used to describe the magnetic orders in the pure compounds. However, the doping of Er on Ho sites which have two strong magnetic moments with two different easy directions creates new and complicated magnetic modulations with possible local disorder effects. One fascinating effect is the development of an induced magnetic state resembling the pure and doped R 2 CuO 4 cuprate with R = Nd and Pr.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it