MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104024440

Zero Modes and Global Antiferromagnetism in Strained Graphene

2014· article· en· W3104024440 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJuSER (Forschungszentrum Jülich) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAntiferromagnetismGrapheneCondensed matter physicsZero (linguistics)Zero-point energyMaterials sciencePhysicsQuantum mechanicsNanotechnology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel magnetic ground state is reported for the Hubbard Hamiltonian in strained graphene. When the chemical potential lies close to the Dirac point, the ground state exhibits locally both the Neel and ferromagnetic orders, even for weak Hubbard interaction. Whereas the Neel order parameter remains of the same sign in the entire system, the magnetization at the boundary takes the opposite sign from the bulk. The total magnetization vanishes this way, and the magnetic ground state is globally only an antiferromagnet. This peculiar ordering stems from the nature of the strain-induced single-particle zero-energy states, which have support on one sublattice of the honeycomb lattice in the bulk, and on the other sublattice near the boundary of a finite system. We support our claim with the self-consistent numerical calculation of the order parameters, as well as by the Monte Carlo simulations of the Hubbard model in both uniformly and nonuniformly strained honeycomb lattice. The present result is contrasted with the magnetic ground state of the same Hubbard model in the presence of a true magnetic field (and for vanishing Zeeman coupling), which is exclusively Neel ordered, with zero local magnetization everywhere in the system.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJuSER (Forschungszentrum Jülich)Same topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207