MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W932215200 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.92.115138

Long-range Coulomb interaction and Majorana fermions

2015· article· en· W932215200 on OpenAlexafffund
Areg Ghazaryan, Tapash Chakraborty

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTopological Materials and Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanada Research ChairsGovernment of Canada
KeywordsCoulombPhysicsCondensed matter physicsSuperconductivityFermionMAJORANAElectronSemiconductorCoulomb's constantQuantum mechanicsCoulomb barrier

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on our exact diagonalization studies of the effects of screened and unscreened long-range Coulomb interaction on the topological superconductivity (TS) phase in a quasi-one-dimensional semiconductor wire, proximity-coupled to an $s$-wave superconductor. We found that inclusion of the Coulomb interaction results in an enlargement of the region of parameter values where TS can be observed. This enlargement is proportional to the screening length of the Coulomb interaction. We also found that the interaction decreases the superconducting bulk gap. Some screening of the Coulomb interaction was found to be essential for observing TS in a quasi-one-dimensional semiconductor wire proximity-coupled to an $s$-wave superconductor. The theoretical framework employed here is quite general and can be used to address the issue of orbital effects and multichannel two-dimensional quantum wire for observation of TS in the presence of the Coulomb interaction between electrons.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicTopological Materials and PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207