Paper detail

Angular resolved specific heat in iron-based superconductors: the case for nodeless extended $s$-wave gap

We consider the variation of the field-induced component of the specific heat $C({\bf H})$ with the direction of the applied field in $Fe-$pnictides within quasi-classical Doppler-shift approximation, with special emphasis to recent experiments on FeSe$_{0.4}$Te$_{0.6}$ [Zheng et al., arXiv:1004.2236]. We show that for extended $s-$wave gap with no nodes, $C({\bf H})$ has $\cos 4 ϕ$ component, where $ϕ$ is the angle between ${\bf H}$ and the direction between hole and electron Fermi surfaces. The maxima of $C({\bf H})$ are at $π/4$, $3π/4$, etc. if the applied field is smaller than $H_0 \leq 1T$, and at $ϕ=0, π/2$, etc. if the applied field is larger than $H_0$. The angle-dependence of $C({\bf H})$, the positions of the maxima, and the relative magnitude of the oscillating component are consistent with the experiments performed in the field of $9T >> H_0$. We show that the observed $\cos 4 ϕ$ variation does not hold if the $s-$wave gap has accidental nodes along the two electron Fermi surfaces.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.