Intertwining orbital current order and superconductivity in kagome metal
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
The nature of superconductivity in newly discovered kagome materials, AV _3 <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:msub> <mml:mi/> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:math> Sb _5 <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:msub> <mml:mi/> <mml:mn>5</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:math> (A = K, Rb, Cs), has been a subject of intense debate. Recent experiments suggest the presence of orbital current order on top of the charge density wave (CDW) and superconductivity. Since the orbital current order breaks time-reversal symmetry, it may fundamentally affect possible superconducting states. In this work, we investigate the mutual influence between the orbital current order and superconductivity in kagome metal with characteristic van Hove singularity (vHS). By explicitly deriving the Landau-Ginzburg theory, we classify possible orbital current order and superconductivity. It turns out that distinct unconventional superconductivities are expected, depending on the orbital current ordering types. Thus, this information can be used to infer the superconducting order parameter when the orbital current order is identified and vice versa. We also discuss possible experiments that may distinguish such superconducting states coexisting with the orbital current order.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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