MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410023492 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2024-0264

Performance at maximum figure of merit for a single quantum dot refrigerator

2025· article· en· W4410023492 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsRefrigerator carFigure of meritQuantum dotOpticsOptoelectronicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we examine the optimal performance characteristics for a single-level quantum dot refrigerator within the framework of ballistic electron transport between two reservoirs. Analytical expressions for the maximum figure of merit were derived. The coefficient of performance at the maximum figure of merit, which depends on the Carnot bound, was analyzed for a refrigerator of the quantum dot system and successfully compared with the maximum cooling power coefficient of performance and the Curzon–Ahlborn coefficient of performance. Besides, the coefficient of performance at the maximum figure of merit of the model was demonstrated through numerical analysis. Our results indicate that the coefficient of performance at maximum cooling power and at maximum figure of merit differs from the maximum cooling power coefficient of performance and the Curzon–Ahlborn coefficient of performance in the limit of a small Carnot coefficient of performance. Optimizing the figure of merit results in the highest coefficient of performance, while optimizing for cooling power leads to the lowest values. It is constrained by an upper bound of Carnot coefficient of performance and a lower bound on the coefficient of performance at maximum cooling power and on the Curzon–Ahlborn coefficient of performance.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesFrench-language works237,207