MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194497655 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.105.024521

Interplay between magnetism and superconductivity in <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>UTe</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>

2022· article· lv· W3194497655 on OpenAlexaff
Di Wei, David R. Saykin, Oliver Miller, Sheng Ran, Shanta Saha, D. F. Agterberg, Jörg Schmalian, Nicholas P. Butch, Johnpierre Paglione, A. Kapitulnik

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2022
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRare-earth and actinide compounds
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersDivision of Materials Sciences and EngineeringBasic Energy SciencesAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyStanford UniversityU.S. Department of EnergyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSuperconductivityParamagnetismPhysicsCondensed matter physicsMagnetizationMagnetismMagnetic fieldVortexQuantum mechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Time-reversal symmetry breaking in the strongly paramagnetic UTe${}_{2}$ is inferred from its spontaneous Kerr response below the superconducting critical temperature ${T}_{c}$. Focusing a Sagnac interferometer beam on the center of the sample, the authors present an extensive study of the magnetic-field-trained Kerr effect in this material, particularly of the nature of the critical state, which is dominated by magnetic vortices. Measurements in the presence of magnetic field reveal the competition between vortex-induced magnetization and the shielding currents of the superconductor.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 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

Citations47
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicRare-earth and actinide compoundsFrench-language works237,207