On Ground States of Spin-1 Bose–Einstein Condensates with Ioffe–Pritchard Magnetic Field in Two and Three Dimensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. New developments of optical trapping techniques make it possible to confine atoms independently of their spin orientation in experiments and thus result in spinor condensates. As a continuation of our previous work [M. Li, X. Luo, J. Wei, and M. Zhen, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 56 (2024), pp. 4375–4414], we investigate physical states as well as qualitative properties describing the aggregation and extinction of atoms, of spin-1 Bose–Einstein condensate in an Ioffe–Pritchard magnetic field, through two conserved quantities, the number of atoms and the total magnetization. Unlike the related free case which is well studied in [Y. Z. Kong, Q. X. Wang, and D. Zhao, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 60 (2021), 152] and our previous work, the presence of the Ioffe–Pritchard magnetic field, which competes dramatically with the harmonic trapping, requires new ideas to capture the physical states and analyze their qualitative properties. Based on the ferromagnetic or antiferromagnetic characterization of spin-1 Bose–Einstein condensate, our results support some experimental observations in [T. Ho and S. Yip, Phys. Rev. Lett., 84 (2000), pp. 4031–4034; C. Law, H. Pu, and N. Bigelow, Phys. Rev. Lett., 81 (1998), pp. 5257–5261] and some numerical analysis on ground states reported in [W. Bao, I. Chern, and Y. Zhang, J. Comput. Phys., 253 (2013), pp. 189–208; W. Bao and F. Lim, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 30 (2008), pp. 1925–1948; W. Bao and H. Wang, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 45 (2007), pp. 2177–2200].
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".