MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388328048 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.108.195405

Refined Majorana phase diagram in a topological insulator–superconductor hybrid system

2023· article· en· W4388328048 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xin Yue, Guo-Jian Qiao, Chuan Sun

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHong Kong University of Science and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanadian Association of Emergency Physicians
KeywordsPairingMAJORANAPhysicsCondensed matter physicsSuperconductivityPhase diagramTopological insulatorTopology (electrical circuits)Band gapInsulator (electricity)Phase (matter)Quantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The edge state of the topological insulator coupled to a superconductor system is able to simulate the Majorana fermion in zero-energy mode since the Kitaev-type pairing is induced by exchanging quasi-excitations in electron tunneling. However, this is not always the case. The present study has revealed that this physical simulation is not valid for a larger surface gap, which is the energy gap of the insulator's surface states. A refined pairing term that depends on the surface gap has been obtained as a second-order effect of the proximity effect, whereas the lowest order produces a constant pairing strength. By carefully considering the dependence of pairing strength on the surface gap, the Majorana phase diagram is re-achieved and a significant difference from previous work is observed, where the pairing strength was assumed to be independent of the surface gap and resulted in a conical phase boundary.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207