I know the people involved, though I haven't run my interpretation past them, so here goes:
They fit data, using a "genetic algorithm", to 2 different models of the superconductor. They find that the magnetic model works better. (Don't ask me how much better)
Relevance: high temp superconductors are believed to work through magnetic interactions. So this is compelling evidence of that. However, the models here are fairly simple ones, not sophisticated ones you would use if you were a hardcore numerical physicist
I would say that they are trying to put the spotlight on the experimental technique, OTOH
Usually you can read the peer review file usually they are not paywalled and more illuminating than the abstract but I guess nature physics is not into that business
They fit data, using a "genetic algorithm", to 2 different models of the superconductor. They find that the magnetic model works better. (Don't ask me how much better)
Relevance: high temp superconductors are believed to work through magnetic interactions. So this is compelling evidence of that. However, the models here are fairly simple ones, not sophisticated ones you would use if you were a hardcore numerical physicist
I would say that they are trying to put the spotlight on the experimental technique, OTOH
Usually you can read the peer review file usually they are not paywalled and more illuminating than the abstract but I guess nature physics is not into that business