MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247097950 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.96.045439

Nonlinear response of biased bilayer graphene at terahertz frequencies

2017· article· en· W4247097950 on OpenAlexafffund
Riley McGouran, Marc M. Dignam

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's University
KeywordsTerahertz radiationGrapheneNonlinear systemBilayer grapheneCondensed matter physicsMaterials sciencePhysicsOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A density-matrix formalism within the length gauge is developed to calculate the nonlinear response of both doped and undoped biased bilayer graphene at terahertz frequencies. Employing a tight-binding model, we derive an effective two-band Hamiltonian with which we calculate the conduction and valence band dispersion, as well as their respective Bloch states. We then solve for the dynamic equations of the density-matrix elements, allowing for the calculation of the intraband and interband current densities and the transmitted and reflected terahertz fields. We find that the third harmonic amplitude generated for undoped biased bilayer graphene with a gap size of 4 meV is larger than that for monolayer graphene or unbiased bilayer graphene for an incident 1 THz single-cycle pulse with a field amplitude of 2.0 kV/cm. We also find for doped biased bilayer graphene that, although the dispersion becomes highly nonparabolic as a bias is applied, the third harmonic is a maximum when there is no bias and diminishes with an increase in bias.

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 score0.002
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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207