MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W44730141

A spin model for strain glass

2024· article· en· W44730141 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Turab Lookman, Romain Vasseur

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallic Glasses and Amorphous Alloys
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Nuclear Security AdministrationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSpin glassMaterials scienceCondensed matter physicsMartensitePhase (matter)Cusp (singularity)Glass transitionMonte Carlo methodOrder and disorderPhase transitionField (mathematics)Amorphous metalThermodynamicsAlloyPhysicsMicrostructureMetallurgyStatisticsComposite materialQuantum mechanics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate that a strain pseudo-spin model for martensitic alloys predicts a glass phase in the presence of disorder, consistent with recent experiments on binary and temary alloys that have established the existence of such a phase above a critical composition. We find that the glass phase, as characterized by the Edwards-Andersen order parameter, exists even in the absence of elastic long-range interactions which compete with the disorder to shift the glass transition to higher values of disorder. Our model predicts a second order phase transition between the martensite and strain glass phases as a function of the disorder. Together with the cusp in the susceptibility and the history dependence in the glass phase in zero-field-cooling and field-cooling curves, these predictions may be tested experimentally by varying the alloy composition. Our approach using mean-field analysis and Monte Carlo simulations may be generalized to the study of glassy behavior in more complex structural transformations in two and three dimensions.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicMetallic Glasses and Amorphous AlloysFrench-language works237,207