MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3143846581 · doi:10.1103/physreva.76.025601

Density-functional theory of the trapped two-dimensional Fermi gas in the unitary regime

2007· article· en· W3143846581 on OpenAlexafffund
Brandon P. van Zyl, D. A. W. Hutchinson, Melodie Need

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMarsden FundUniversities Space Research Association
KeywordsPhysicsUnitary stateFermi gasDensity functional theoryFermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeQuantum Monte CarloQuantum mechanicsSimple (philosophy)Mathematical physicsMonte Carlo methodMathematicsStatisticsElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recent paper by T. Papenbrock [Phys. Rev. A 72, 041602(R) (2005)] suggests that a determination of the universal factor ${\ensuremath{\xi}}_{3\mathrm{D}}$ for a harmonically trapped, unpolarized dilute Fermi gas in the unitary regime may be obtained within the framework of a simple density-functional theory (DFT). One of the key results of that work is an estimate for the universal factor ${\ensuremath{\xi}}_{3\mathrm{D}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.54$, which is within 20% of the generally accepted quantum Monte Carlo simulation value of ${\ensuremath{\xi}}_{3\mathrm{D}}=0.44\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01$. Motivated by this result, this report investigates the determination of the universal factor ${\ensuremath{\xi}}_{2\mathrm{D}}$ for a two-dimensional trapped Fermi gas, and suggests that the simple DFT approach of Papenbrock provides an exact result of ${\ensuremath{\xi}}_{2\mathrm{D}}=1$ in two dimensions.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.278
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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