MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391556124 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.01468

A momentum-resolved view of polaron formation in materials

2024· preprint· en· W4391556124 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tristan L. Britt, Fabio Caruso, Bradley J. Siwick

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSuperconductivity in MgB2 and Alloys
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsPolaronMomentum (technical analysis)PhysicsQuantum electrodynamicsTheoretical physicsNuclear physicsEconomicsElectronFinancial economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A combined experimental and computational methodology for interrogating the phonon contribution to polaron formation in real materials is developed. Using LiF as an example, we show that the recent ab-initio theory of Sio et. al [PRL 122, 246403 (2019)] makes predictions of the momentum- and branch dependent phonon amplitides in polaron quasiparticles that are testable using ultrafast electron diffuse scattering (UEDS) and related techniques. The large electron polaron in LiF has UEDS signatures that are qualitatively similar to those expected from a simple point-defect model, but the small hole polaron exhibits a profoundly anisotropic UEDS pattern that is in poor agreement with a point-defect model. We also show that these polaron diffuse scattering signatures are directly emblematic of the underlying polaron wavefunction. The combination of new time and momentum resolved experimental probes of nonequilibrium phonons with novel computational methods promises to complement the qualitative results obtained via model Hamiltonians with a first principles, material-specific quantiative understanding of polarons and their properties.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.143 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSuperconductivity in MgB2 and AlloysFrench-language works237,207