← Back to search

Anomalous temperature dependence of spin susceptibility around a nonmagnetic impurity in high-Tc cuprate superconductors

Y. Ohashi

DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.054522 · Physical Review B

T1

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

Local magnetic properties around a nonmagnetic impurity are investigated in the superconducting state of high-Tc cuprates. We consider a model two-dimensional dx2−y2-wave superconductor with strong antiferromagnetic (AF) spin fluctuations and calculate the spin susceptibility around the impurity. We show that the uniform susceptibility, which is usually suppressed in spin-singlet superconductivity, increases with decreasing temperature around the impurity when the impurity scattering is in the unitarity limit. This anomalous temperature dependence is more remarkable when the impurity potential is extended spatially and the AF spin fluctuations are stronger. Our results agree with the anomalous temperature dependence of the Knight shift on Li that was recently observed in YBa2(Cu1−xLix)3O6+y.

Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval

FormulaReported Tc (K)Pressure (GPa)Type
YBa2(Cu1-xLix)3O6+y

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

85.3Pressure not reportedunknown
YBa2(Cu1-xLix)3O6+y

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

79.5Pressure not reportedunknown
YBa2(Cu1-xLix)3O6+y

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

41Pressure not reportedunknown
Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

—Pressure not reportedunknown

Similar papers