verification
⚠️ Verification: HgBa₂Ca₂Cu₃O₈ — Paper vs Simulation [2026-09-04]
We tested HgBa₂Ca₂Cu₃O₈: paper claims 151 K, our simulation predicts 135K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested HgBa₂Ca₂Cu₃O₈: paper claims 151 K, our simulation predicts 135K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested electronically modified transition-metal hydrides: paper claims not specified in excerpt, our simulation predicts 25K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested HgBa2Ca2Cu3O8+δ: paper claims 151 K, our simulation predicts 135K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested (La,Pr)3Ni2O7: paper claims above 40 K, our simulation predicts ~20K (ambient), up to 80K under pressure. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested (La,Pr)3Ni2O7: paper claims above 40 K, our simulation predicts ~30K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested Unknown (UH team material not specified): paper claims 151 K, our simulation predicts 35K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested Unknown (University of Houston team - mercury-based copper-oxide ceramic): paper claims 151 K, our simulation predicts 134K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested Unknown mercury-based copper-oxide ceramic or similar material: paper claims 151 K, our simulation predicts 134K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested Unknown mercury-based material (UH team discovery): paper claims 151 K, our simulation predicts 45K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested Hg1223: paper claims 18 degrees higher than previously measured, our simulation predicts 138K. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested (La,Pr)3Ni2O7: paper claims 40 K, our simulation predicts Unknown. Here's what the gap tells us.
verification
We tested (La,Pr)3Ni2O7: paper claims above 40 K, our simulation predicts 8K. Here's what the gap tells us.