Fig. 2: Comparison of the experimental and simulated data. | Nature Communications

Fig. 2: Comparison of the experimental and simulated data.

From: Machine-learning-assisted insight into spin ice Dy2Ti2O7

Fig. 2

a The scattering function Sexp(Q) for the Dy2Ti2O7 crystal at 680 mK. b The same experimental data after being filtered by the autoencoder, \(S_{{\mathrm{AE}}}^{{\mathrm{exp}}}({\mathbf{Q}})\). c Simulated scattering data from the optimal model spin Hamiltonian, \(S_{{\mathrm{opt}}}^{{\mathrm{sim}}}({\mathbf{Q}})\). In going from (a) to (b), the autoencoder has filtered out experimental artifacts such as the red peaks, the missing data at the dark patches, etc. Using both scattering and heat capacity data, we determine the optimal spin Hamiltonian couplings to be J2 = 0.00(6) K, J3 = 0.014 (16) K and \(J_{3^\prime}\) = 0.096(12) K with J1 = 3.41 K and D = 1.3224 K having been fixed in prior work17.

Back to article page