Researcher profile

D. J. Safarik

D. J. Safarik contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2012arXiv

Superconductivity in the Heusler Family of Intermetallics

Several physical properties of the superconducting Heusler compounds, focusing on two systems (Y, Lu, Sc)Pd2Sn and APd2M, where A=Hf, Zr and M=Al, In, are summarized and compared. The analysis of the data shows the importance of the electron-phonon coupling for superconductivity in this family. We report the superconducting parameters of YPd2Sn, which has the highest Tc among all known Heusler superconductors.

preprint2010arXiv

Band structure of SnTe studied by Photoemission Spectroscopy

We present an angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy study of the electronic structure of SnTe, and compare the experimental results to ab initio band structure calculations as well as a simplified tight-binding model of the p-bands. Our study reveals the conjectured complex Fermi surface structure near the L-points showing topological changes in the bands from disconnected pockets, to open tubes, and then to cuboids as the binding energy increases, resolving lingering issues about the electronic structure. The chemical potential at the crystal surface is found to be 0.5eV below the gap, corresponding to a carrier density of p =1.14x10^{21} cm^{-3} or 7.2x10^{-2} holes per unit cell. At a temperature below the cubic-rhombohedral structural transition a small shift in spectral energy of the valance band is found, in agreement with model predictions.

preprint2010arXiv

Tin telluride: a weakly co-elastic metal

We report resonant ultrasound spectroscopy (RUS), dilatometry/magnetostriction, magnetotransport, magnetization, specific heat, and $^{119}$Sn Mössbauer spectroscopy measurements on SnTe and Sn$_{0.995}$Cr$_{0.005}$Te. Hall measurements at $T=77$ K indicate that our Bridgman-grown single crystals have a $p$-type carrier concentration of $3.4 \times 10^{19}$ cm$^{-3}$ and that our Cr-doped crystals have an $n$-type concentration of $5.8 \times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-3}$. Although our SnTe crystals are diamagnetic over the temperature range $2\, \text{K} \leq T \leq 1100\, \text{K}$, the Cr-doped crystals are room temperature ferromagnets with a Curie temperature of 294 K. For each sample type, three-terminal capacitive dilatometry measurements detect a subtle 0.5 micron distortion at $T_c \approx 85$ K. Whereas our RUS measurements on SnTe show elastic hardening near the structural transition, pointing to co-elastic behavior, similar measurements on Sn$_{0.995}$Cr$_{0.005}$Te show a pronounced softening, pointing to ferroelastic behavior. Effective Debye temperature, $θ_D$, values of SnTe obtained from $^{119}$Sn Mössbauer studies show a hardening of phonons in the range 60--115K ($θ_D$ = 162K) as compared with the 100--300K range ($θ_D$ = 150K). In addition, a precursor softening extending over approximately 100 K anticipates this collapse at the critical temperature, and quantitative analysis over three decades of its reduced modulus finds $ΔC_{44}/C_{44}=A|(T-T_0)/T_0|^{-κ}$ with $κ= 0.50 \pm 0.02 $, a value indicating a three-dimensional softening of phonon branches at a temperature $T_0 \sim 75$ K, considerably below $T_c$. We suggest that the differences in these two types of elastic behaviors lie in the absence of elastic domain wall motion in the one case and their nucleation in the other.