Investigation of the adequacy of the two-dimensional t−J model for high-temperature superconductivity
Gang Su
DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.72.092510 · 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
It is widely thought that the two-dimensional (2D) t−J model captures essential features of the cuprate oxides. However, some recent results on the pairing correlations in this model, which were obtained by various numerical or analytical methods, are controversial. Therefore, whether the 2D t−J model is really suitable for the cuprate oxides is still under debate. We argue that the 2D t−J model may be inadequate for overall describing high temperature superconductivity.
Similar papers
A Systematic Study of Electron-Phonon Coupling to Oxygen Modes Across the Cuprates
similarity 0.89S. Johnston et al. · 2010 · arXiv:1007.3451
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Origin of Superconductivity in 2D-Organic Compounds and High-T_c Cuprates
similarity 0.89Hisashi Kondo & Tôru Moriya · 1999 · arXiv:cond-mat/9909024
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
High Temperature Superconductivity in the 2D t-J Model at Metal-Insulator Transition: Variational Mean Field Results
similarity 0.89Ken Cappon · 1998 · arXiv:cond-mat/9806035
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Effective t-J model Hamiltonian parameters of monolayered cuprate superconductors from ab initio electronic structure calculations
similarity 0.89David Muñoz et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Ground-state phase diagram of the two-dimensional t-J model
similarity 0.88Sheng-Hao Li et al. · 2010 · arXiv:1001.3343
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Doping and energy dependent microwave conductivity of kinetic energy driven superconductors with extended impurities
similarity 0.88Zhi Wang et al. · 2008 · arXiv:0802.1760
Source status unknown — claims are unverified