MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7157109307 · doi:10.4208/cicp.2008.v4.p124

Advanced Monte Carlo Study of the Goldstone Mode Singularity in the 3D XY Model

2008· article· W7157109307 on OpenAlexaff
J. Kaupu�s, R.V.N. Melnik, J. Rim�?ns

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Computational Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Language
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodSingularityMagnetizationClassical XY modelExponentMode (computer interface)Critical exponentGoldstone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced Monte Carlo simulations of magnetisation and susceptibility in 3D XY model are performed at two different coupling constants β =0.55 and β =0.5, completing our previous simulation results with additional data points and extending the range of the external field to twice as small values as previously reported (h ≥ 0.00015625). The simulated maximal lattices sizes are also increased from L=384 to L=512. Our aim is an improved estimation of the exponent ρ, describing the Goldstone mode singularity M(h) = M(+0)+chρ at h → 0, where M is the magnetisation. The data reveal some unexpected small oscillations. It makes the estimation by many-parameter fits of the magnetisation data unstable, and we are looking for an alternative method. Our best estimate ρ = 0.555(17) is extracted from the analysis of effective exponents determined from local fits of the susceptibility data. This method gives stable and consistent results for both values of β, taking into account the leading as well as the subleading correction to scaling. We report also the values of spontaneous magnetisation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Computational PhysicsSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207