Machine-learning-based detection of spin structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most important magnetic spin structures is the topologically stabilized skyrmion quasiparticle.Its interesting physical properties make it a candidate for memory and efficient neuromorphic computation schemes.For device operation, the detection of the position, shape, and size of skyrmions is required and magnetic imaging is typically employed.A frequently used technique is magneto-optical Kerr microscopy, in which, depending on the sample's material composition, temperature, material growing procedures, etc., the measurements suffer from noise, low contrast, intensity gradients, or other optical artifacts.Conventional image analysis packages require manual treatment, and a more automatic solution is required.We report a convolutional neural network specifically designed for segmentation problems to detect the position and shape of skyrmions in our measurements.The network is tuned using selected techniques to optimize predictions and, in particular, the number of detected classes is found to govern the performance.The results of this study show that a well-trained network is a viable method of automating data preprocessing in magnetic microscopy.The approach is easily extendable to other spin structures and other magnetic imaging methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".