MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386224964 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.108.075163

Superconductivity in the two-dimensional Hubbard model with cellular dynamical mean-field theory: A quantum impurity model analysis

2023· article· en· W4386224964 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Walsh, M. Charlebois, P. Sémon, A.–M. S. Tremblay, G. Sordi

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundCompute Canada
KeywordsPhysicsSuperconductivityHubbard modelCondensed matter physicsPairingMott insulatorElectronSpin (aerodynamics)Singlet stateCluster (spacecraft)Quantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Doping a Mott insulator gives rise to unconventional superconducting correlations. Here we address the interplay between $d$-wave superconductivity and Mott physics using the two-dimensional Hubbard model with cellular dynamical mean-field theory on a $2\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}2$ plaquette. Our approach is to study superconducting correlations from the perspective of a cluster quantum impurity model embedded in a self-consistent bath. At the level of the cluster, we calculate the probabilities of the possible cluster electrons configurations. Upon condensation, we find an increased probability that cluster electrons occupy a four-electron singlet configuration, enabling us to identify this type of short-range spin correlation as key to superconducting pairing. The increased probability of this four-electron singlet comes at the expense of a reduced probability of a four-electron triplet with no significant probability redistribution of fluctuations of charges. This allows us to establish that superconductivity at the level of the cluster primarily involves a reorganization of short-range spin correlations rather than charge correlations. We gain information about the bath by studying the spectral weight of the hybridization function. Upon condensation, we find a transfer of spectral weight leading to the opening of a superconducting gap. We use these insights to interpret the signatures of superconducting correlations in the density of states of the system and in the zero-frequency spin susceptibility.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.315 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207