MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Non-Abelian Hyperbolic Band Theory from Supercells

2023· article· en· W4389246677 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick M. Lenggenhager, Joseph Maciejko, Tomáš Bzdušek

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanada Research ChairsSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungBoettcher FoundationUniversity of AlbertaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of AlbertaPacific Institute for the Mathematical SciencesDivision of Mathematical SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBloch wavePhysicsAbelian groupSupercellEigenvalues and eigenvectorsGapless playbackQuantum mechanicsTheoretical physicsCondensed matter physicsPure mathematicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wave functions on periodic lattices are commonly described by Bloch band theory. Besides Abelian Bloch states labeled by a momentum vector, hyperbolic lattices support non-Abelian Bloch states that have so far eluded analytical treatments. By adapting the solid-state-physics notions of supercells and zone folding, we devise a method for the systematic construction of non-Abelian Bloch states. The method applies Abelian band theory to sequences of supercells, recursively built as symmetric aggregates of smaller cells, and enables a rapidly convergent computation of bulk spectra and eigenstates for both gapless and gapped tight-binding models. Our supercell method provides an efficient means of approximating the thermodynamic limit and marks a pivotal step toward a complete band-theoretic characterization of hyperbolic lattices.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations37
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207