Datasets:
A_d at half filling (δ = 0, Ne = 36) looks much larger than the 4×4 references
A small observation about one entry of scoring_meta.json, in case it is useful.
The published A_d at δ = 0 is 0.0384, about two-thirds of the dome maximum (0.0585). The references we know of
point to a much smaller value at half filling (U/t = 8):
| source | lattice | P_d at n = 1 |
|---|---|---|
ED, validation/comparison_4x4_ED_vs_VMC.md (Ku-ku) |
4×4, R = (2,2) | 0.0062 |
organizer VMC, same file (dwave=0.15) |
4×4, R = (2,2) | 0.0008 |
| U = 0 (exact) | any | 0 |
| our VMC with a Néel-field ansatz (energy within 5 % of ED on 4×4, where it gives 0.0075) | 6×6, R = (3,3) | 0.0049 ± 0.0007 |
So the 6×6 entry is at least about 5× larger than any of these.
Why it may matter: 101 of the current active materials sit at δ = 0 and all use this single value
(three of them are in the top 50, e.g. Co₂Se₂ and Ni₂Se₂). The leaders are not affected.
Could you check the δ = 0 point of the reference solver, for example whether the antiferromagnetic
correlations are captured at half filling? One of our own proposals sits at δ = 0 (Ni₂Se₂ from #14), so a lower value
would lower it too.
Disclosure: prepared with AI assistance (Claude Code); I am not a many-body specialist. Scripts and
outputs for the numbers above are available on request.