MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392951607 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.109.104419

Weak first-order phase transitions in the frustrated square lattice <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>J</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> classical Ising model

2024· article· lv· W4392951607 on OpenAlexaff
Adil A. Gangat

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2024
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum many-body systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCentre of Excellence in Engineered Quantum Systems, Australian Research Council
KeywordsOrder (exchange)Square latticeLattice (music)PhysicsPhase (matter)Computer scienceCombinatoricsCondensed matter physicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsIsing model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classical ${J}_{1}\ensuremath{-}{J}_{2}$ Ising model on the square lattice is a minimal model of frustrated magnetism whose phase boundaries have remained under scrutiny for decades. Signs of first-order phase transitions have appeared in some studies, but strong evidence remains lacking. The current consensus, based upon the numerical data and theoretical arguments in [S. Jin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 045702 (2012)], is that first-order phase transitions are ruled out in the region $g={J}_{2}/|{J}_{1}|\ensuremath{\gtrsim}0.67$. We point out a loophole in the basis for this consensus, and we find strong evidence that the phase boundary is instead weak first order at $0.67\ensuremath{\lesssim}g&lt;\ensuremath{\infty}$ such that it asymptotically becomes second order when $g\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\ensuremath{\infty}$. We also find strong evidence that the phase boundary is first order in the region $0.5&lt;g\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.67$. We establish these results with adiabatic evolution of matrix product states directly in the thermodynamic limit, and with the theory of finite-entanglement scaling. We also find suggestive evidence that when $g\ensuremath{\rightarrow}0.{5}^{+}$, the phase boundary becomes of an anomalous first-order type wherein the correlation length is very large in one of the coexisting phases but very small in the other.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1400.008

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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.272 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicQuantum many-body systemsFrench-language works237,207