Linear spectroscopy of collective modes and the gap structure in two-dimensional superconductors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider optical response in multiband, multilayer two-dimensional superconductors. Within a simple model, we show that linear response to AC gating can detect collective modes of the condensate, such as Leggett and clapping modes. We show how trigonal warping of the superconducting order parameter can help facilitate detection of clapping modes. Taking rhombohedral trilayer graphene as an example, we consider several possible pairing mechanisms and show that all-electronic mechanisms may produce in-gap clapping modes. These modes, if present, should be detectable in the absorption of microwaves applied via the gate electrodes, which are necessary to enable superconductivity in this and many other settings; their detection would constitute strong evidence for unconventional pairing. Last, we show that absorption at frequencies above the superconducting gap <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <a:mrow> <a:mn>2</a:mn> <a:mo>|</a:mo> <a:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</a:mi> <a:mo>|</a:mo> </a:mrow> </a:math> also contains a wealth of information about the gap structure. Our results suggest that linear spectroscopy can be a powerful tool for the characterization of unconventional two-dimensional 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".