MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Superconductivity above 30K Achieved in Dense Scandium

2023· article· en· W4386715181 on OpenAlexafffund
Xin 鑫 He 何, Changling 昌玲 Zhang 张, Zhiwen 芷文 Li 李, Sijia 思佳 Zhang 张, Shaomin Feng, Jianfa 建发 Zhao 赵, Ke 可 Lu 卢, Baosen Min, Yi 毅 Peng 彭, Tao Wang, Jin 静 Song 宋, Luhong Wang, Saori I. Kawaguchi, Cheng 诚 Ji 吉, Bing 冰 Li 李, Haozhe Liu, John S. Tse, Changqing 常青 Jin 靳

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Physics Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicIron-based superconductors research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersChinese Academy of SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaterials scienceSuperconductivityPhysicsCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Superconductivity is one of most intriguing quantum phenomena, and the quest for elemental superconductors with high critical temperature ( T c ) is of great scientific significance due to their relatively simple material composition and the underlying mechanism. Here we report the experimental discovery of densely compressed scandium (Sc) becoming the first elemental superconductor with T c breaking into 30 K range, which is comparable to the T c values of the classic La–Ba–Cu–O or LaFeAsO superconductors. Our results show that T c onset of Sc increases from ∼ 3 K at around 43 GPa to ∼ 32 K at about 283 GPa ( T c zero ∼ 31 K), which is well above liquid neon temperature. Interestingly, measured T c shows no sign of saturation up to the maximum pressure achieved in our experiments, indicating that T c may be even higher upon further compression.

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 score0.008

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Physics LettersSame topicIron-based superconductors researchFrench-language works237,207