Comparison of paramagnetic- and nonmagnetic-impurity effects on superconductivity in Nd1.85Ce0.15CuO4
Jun Sugiyama, Shinya Tokuono, Shin-ichi Koriyama, H. Yamauchi, Shoji Tanaka
DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.43.10489 · Physical Review B
Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval
Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.
Abstract
The effects of substitution of Co, Ni, or Zn for Cu in the electron-doped superconductors, Nd1.85Ce0.15Cu1−xMxO4 (with M=Co, Ni, or Zn, x≤0.05), have been investigated by powder x-ray diffraction analysis and resistivity, magnetic-susceptibility, and Hall-coefficient measurements. It is observed that only 0.7% Co or 0.8% Ni substitution for Cu destroys superconductivity. On the contrary, for the Zn-substituted samples, it is observed that Tc decreases proportionally to x and the magnitude of Tc is ∼9 K even for the 2% Zn-substituted sample. This result suggests that the pair-breaking effect plays a dominant role in the suppression of superconductivity in the Co- or Ni-substitute samples. The absolute values of the exchange-interaction energy between an electron and a Co ion and of that between an electron and a Ni ion are estimated at ∼0.09 and ∼0.08 eV, respectively. These values are comparable to those of the conventional BCS-type superconductors containing paramagnetic impurities. Both the absolute value of the Hall coefficient (‖RH‖) and its temperature coefficient (d‖RH‖/dT) are found to decrease as x increases for all the samples at temperatures higher than 120 K. However, for the Co-substituted samples, it is clearly observed that ‖RH‖ increases proportionally to x at 30 K, while ‖RH‖ decreases monotonically with increasing x for the Ni- or Zn-substitute samples. Therefore, it seems that there are no clear relations between the temperature dependence of RH and the suppression in the magnitude of Tc due to the substitutional effects.
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nd1.85Ce0.15CuO4 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | 20 | Pressure not reported | onset |
| Nd1.85Ce0.15CuO4 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | 20 | Pressure not reported | onset |
| Nd1.85Ce0.15Cu1-xZnxO4 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | 9 | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
Specific heat and magnetic susceptibility of superconducting and semiconducting Nd1.85Ce0.15CuO4−δ
similarity 0.95S. J. Collocott et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Effect of Ga substitution on the superconducting properties of the electron-doped system: Nd-Ce-Cu-O
similarity 0.95I. Felner et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Effect of a magnetic field on the long-range magnetic order in insulating Nd2CuO4 and nonsuperconducting and superconducting Nd1.85Ce0.15CuO4
similarity 0.95M. Matsuura et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Absence of a magnetic-field effect on static magnetic order in the electron-doped superconductor Nd1.86Ce0.14CuO4
similarity 0.95M. Matsuda et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Nonmonotonic resistivity transitions in granular superconducting ceramics
similarity 0.95A. Gerber et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Magnetic order, spin correlations, and superconductivity in single-crystal Nd1.85Ce0.15CuO4+δ
similarity 0.95M. Matsuda et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified