Paper detail

Comment on arXiv:1105.6233 entitled "Neutron-Inelastic-Scattering Peak by Dissipationless Mechanism in the s++-wave State in Iron-based Superconductors" by S. Onari and H. Kontani

Recently, Onari and Kontani submitted a paper [arXiv:1105.6233] which criticizes our recent theoretical study [arXiv:1103.0586] on the neutron scattering experiment as a probe for determining the superconducting gap in the iron pnictides. In their paper, Onari and Kontani have developed a formalism in which the imaginary part of the dynamical spin susceptibility (Im$χ_s(\Vec{q},ω)$) in the superconducting state can be more accurately calculated especially in the $ω<2Δ$ regime, where $Δ$ is the superconducting gap. In section IIIC of their paper, they mention that the conclusions of our paper are "incorrect based on inaccurate numerical calculation". In the present Comment, we show that this in fact is not correct.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.