MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408302884 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.111.094509

Atypical vortex lattice and the magnetic penetration depth in superconducting <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Sr</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:msub> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RuO</mml:mi> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:math> deduced by <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mi>μ</mml:mi> <mml:mi>SR</mml:mi> </mml:math>

2025· article· lv· W4408302884 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Yakovlev, Z. Kartsonas, J. E. Sonier

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2025
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Condensed Matter Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLondon penetration depthCondensed matter physicsPenetration depthVortexSuperconductivityPhysicsQuantum mechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For three decades, the superconducting order parameter symmetry in Sr${}_{2}$RuO${}_{4}$ has remained elusive. In most superconductors this symmetry manifests in the structure of the magnetic vortex lattice induced by applying a magnetic field. The minimum field of the vortex lattice is typically located at the center of a triangular or square arrangement of vortices. The authors report here on an unusual situation for Sr${}_{2}$RuO${}_{4}$, where the minimum field appears to be between midway between nearest-neighbor vortices in a square lattice. This finding introduces another constraint on possible superconducting order parameters.

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)0.003
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), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.007

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicAdvanced Condensed Matter PhysicsFrench-language works237,207