Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Comment on arXiv:1810.04634v1 [cond-mat.str-el], "Hole-pocket-driven superconductivity and its universal features in the electron-doped cuprates"

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
J. E. Hirsch

Superconductivity · Submitted 24 Oct 2018

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim Greven that "clearly point to hole-pocket-driven superconductivity in these nominally electron-doped materials", "reveal hole superconductivity in the electron-doped high-temperature superconductors" "after three decades of enormous scientific inquiry", and point to "a single underlying hole-related mechanism of superconductivity in the cuprates regardless of nominal carrier type".

how it is stated · asserted 0.97 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID1810.10204 (version 1)
Pith ID6OF7TAH6, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationJ. E. Hirsch. "Comment on arXiv:1810.04634v1 [cond-mat.str-el], "Hole-pocket-driven superconductivity and its universal features in the electron-doped cuprates"." arXiv:1810.10204 (2018). https://pith.science/paper/6OF7TAH6
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,198 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.12 · states limitation 0.09 · human participants 0.04 · controlled comparison 0.04 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.13 · compares with prior results 0.74 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

The following letter, titled "Electron-Superconductivity in Oxides?", was submitted to Nature [Scientific Correspondence Section] on March 2, 1989, shortly after the experimental discovery of electron-doped cuprates announced in Nature on January 26, 1989. It predicted the findings recently reported in arXiv:1810.04634 by Yangmu Li, W. Tabis, Y. Tang, G. Yu, J. Jaroszynski, N. Barisic and M. Greven that "clearly point to hole-pocket-driven superconductivity in these nominally electron-doped materials", "reveal hole superconductivity in the electron-doped high-temperature superconductors" "after three decades of enormous scientific inquiry", and point to "a single underlying hole-related mechanism of superconductivity in the cuprates regardless of nominal carrier type". Many more papers on this topic were published by F. Marsiglio and the author in the ensuing 30 years from 1989 to the present. In omitting to refer to any of these theoretical works, arXiv:1810.04634 presents a misleading picture.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 The following letter, titled "Electron-Superconductivity in Oxides?", was submitted to Nature [Scientific Correspondence Section] on March 2, 1989, shortly after the experimental discovery of electron-doped cuprates announced in Nature on January 26, 1989. background 0.97 0.26 0.03 asserted 0.99
s1 It predicted the findings recently reported in arXiv:1810.04634 by Yangmu Li, W. Tabis, Y. Tang, G. Yu, J. Jaroszynski, N. Barisic and M. contribution 0.43 0.13 0.17 asserted 1.00
s2 Greven that "clearly point to hole-pocket-driven superconductivity in these nominally electron-doped materials", "reveal hole superconductivity in the electron-doped high-temperature superconductors" "after three decades of enormous scientific inquiry", and point to "a single underlying hole-related mechanism of superconductivity in the cuprates regardless of nominal carrier type". interpretation 0.43 0.11 0.58 asserted 0.97
s3 Many more papers on this topic were published by F. background 0.90 0.07 0.03 asserted 0.81
s4 Marsiglio and the author in the ensuing 30 years from 1989 to the present. background 0.95 0.24 0.04 asserted 0.94
s5 In omitting to refer to any of these theoretical works, arXiv:1810.04634 presents a misleading picture. interpretation 0.69 0.09 0.72 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: position or commentary 1.00 · evidence from literature 0.83.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

The following letter, titled "Electron-Superconductivity in Oxides?", was submitted to Nature [Scientific Correspondence Section] on March 2, 1989, shortly after the experimental discovery of electron-doped cuprates announced in Nature on January 26, 1989. It predicted the findings recently reported in arXiv:1810.04634 by Yangmu Li, W. Tabis, Y. Tang, G. Yu, J. Jaroszynski, N. Barisic and M. Greven that "clearly point to hole-pocket-driven superconductivity in these nominally electron-doped materials", "reveal hole superconductivity in the electron-doped high-temperature superconductors" "after three decades of enormous scientific inquiry", and point to "a single underlying hole-related mechanism of superconductivity in the cuprates regardless of nominal carrier type". Many more papers on this topic were published by F. Marsiglio and the author in the ensuing 30 years from 1989 to the present. In omitting to refer to any of these theoretical works, arXiv:1810.04634 presents a misleading picture.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.