← Back to search

Dissimilarities between the electronic structure of chemically doped and chemically pressurized iron pnictides from an angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy study

S. Thirupathaiah, E. D. L. Rienks, H. S. Jeevan, R. Ovsyannikov, E. Slooten, J. Kaas, E. van Heumen, S. de Jong, H. A. Duerr, K. Siemensmeyer, R. Follath, P. Gegenwart, M. S. Golden, J. Fink

arXiv:1007.5205 · DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.84.014531 · 2010-07-29 · J3ea

T1theoretical22 citations

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

We have studied the electronic structure of EuFe2As2-xPx using high resolution angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy. Upon substituting As with the isovalent P, which leads to a chemical pressure and to superconductivity, we observe a non-rigid-band like change of the electronic structure along the center of the Brillouin zone (BZ): an orbital and kz dependent increase or decrease in the size of the hole pockets near the Gamma - Z line. On the other hand, the diameter of the Fermi surface cylinders at the BZ corner forming electron pockets, hardly changes. This is in stark contrast to p and n-type doped iron pnictides where, on the basis of ARPES experiments, a more rigid-band like behavior has been proposed. These findings indicate that there are different ways in which the nesting conditions can be reduced causing the destabilization of the antiferromagnetic order and the appearance of the superconducting dome.

Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval

FormulaReported Tc (K)Pressure (GPa)Type
EuFe2As2-xPx

Archive — visibility unverified

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

29Pressure not reportedunknown
BaFe2As2-xPx

Archive — visibility unverified

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

30Pressure not reportedunknown

Similar papers