Paper detail

Contrast of LiFeAs with isostructural, isoelectronic, and non-superconducting MgFeGe

Stoichiometric LiFeAs at ambient pressure is an 18 K superconductor while isoelectronic MgFeGe is not, despite their extremely similar electronic structures. To investigate possible sources of this distinctively different superconducting behavior, we quantify the differences using first principles density functional theory, establishing first that the Fe total 3d occupations are identical in the two compounds. Individual 3d orbital occupations also differ very little ($\sim 0.01$). The differences in Fermi surfaces (FSs) do not seem significant; however a redistribution of bands just above the Fermi level does represent a possibly significant distinction. Because the bands and FSs of LiFeAs are less in agreement with experiment than for other iron-pnictides, we study the effects of additional exchange-correlations effects beyond GGA (the generalized gradient approximation) by applying the modified Becke-Johnson potential (mBJ) exchange potential, which gives much improved bandgaps in insulators compared to GGA and might be useful for semimetals such as the Fe-based superconductors. Overall, we conclude that the mBJ corrections do not improve the description of LiFeAs as compared to experiment.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.