Nearly twofold overestimation of the superconducting volume fraction in pressurized Ruddlesden-Popper nickelates
Aleksandr V. Korolev, Evgeny F. Talantsev
arXiv:2602.19282 · 2026-02-22
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 detection of the DC diamagnetic state in pressurized Ruddlesden-Popper nickelates remained an unsolved experimental problem until recent experiments in which Zhu et al.$^1$ measured the DC diamagnetic responses in zero-field cooled (ZFC) mode in pressurized La4Ni3O10. Zhu et al.$^1$ reported that the ratio of the measured ZFC magnetic moment to the Meissner magnetic moment of the sample (and this ratio was termed the superconducting volume fraction$f$) reaches 81-86%. We regard outstanding experimental results$^1$; however, our calculations based on the reported experimental datasets$^1$ using the standard procedure showed the ratio to be 51-59%. Upon our request, Zhu et al.$^1$ provided detailed explanations and the equation they used to calculate$f$. To our knowledge, the procedure$^1$ and equation$^1$ for calculating $f$ have never been mentioned or described before, including in Ref.$^1$. Here we argue that the proposed equation$^1$ and procedure$^1$ are incorrect, and that this equation$^1$ results in multiple overestimations of the superconducting volume fraction in the sample. This overestimation error affects all superconducting volume fractions $f$ in Ruddlesden-Popper nickelates reported to date$^{1-4}$. Therefore, we describe the error we discovered in this paper.
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| La4Ni3O10 Archive — disputed claim Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
On the estimating the superconducting volume fraction from the internal magnetic susceptibility
similarity 0.92Aleksandr V. Korolev & Evgeny F. Talantsev · 2026 · arXiv:2603.08302
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Role of magnetic dopants in the phase diagram of Sm1111 pnictides: The Mn case
similarity 0.82G. Lamura et al. · 2016 · arXiv:1612.00952
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Diamagnetism around the Meissner transition in a homogeneous cuprate single crystal
similarity 0.80J. Mosqueira et al. · 2007 · arXiv:0709.0193
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Synthesis and characterization of the infinite-layer superconductor Sr_{0.9}La_{0.1}CuO_{2}
similarity 0.80C. U. Jung et al. · 2000 · arXiv:cond-mat/0010304
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
The correlation between the Nernst effect and fluctuation diamagnetism in strongly fluctuating superconductors
similarity 0.80Kingshuk Sarkar et al. · 2017 · arXiv:1701.08091
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Superconductivity in Ruddlesden-Popper nickelates: a review of recent progress, focusing on thin films
similarity 0.79Yang Zhang et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2604.18385
Source status unknown — claims are unverified