MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394948063 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.110.064509

Microscopic solutions for vortex clustering in two-band type-1.5 superconductors

2024· preprint· en· W4394948063 on OpenAlexaff
Igor Timoshuk, Egor Babaev

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
FundersVetenskapsrådetKnut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse
KeywordsVortexSuperconductivityCluster analysisType (biology)Type-II superconductorPhysicsCondensed matter physicsMechanicsComputer scienceGeologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two-band superconductors exhibit a distinct phase characterized by two correlation lengths, one smaller and the other larger than the magnetic field penetration length. This regime was coined type-1.5 superconductivity, with several unconventional properties, such as vortex clustering. However, a fully microscopic solution for vortex clusters has remained challenging due to computational complexities beyond quasiclassical models. This work presents numerical solutions obtained in a fully self-consistent two-band Bogoliubov–de Gennes model. We show the presence of discrepant correlation lengths leading to vortex clustering in two-band superconductors. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B→Same topicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism→French-language works237,207→