Paper detail

Specific heat of Ba$_{0.59}$K$_{0.41}$Fe$_{2}$As$_{2}$, and a new method for identifying the electron contribution: two electron bands with different energy gaps in the superconducting state

We report measurements of the specific heat of Ba$_{0.59}$K$_{0.41}$Fe$_{2}$As$_{2}$, an Fe-pnictide superconductor with $T_c$ = 36.9 K, for which there are suggestions of an unusual electron pairing mechanism. We use a new method of analysis of the data to derive the parameters characteristic of the electron contribution. It is based on comparisons of $α$-model expressions for the electron contribution with the total measured specific heat, which give the electron contribution directly. It obviates the need in the conventional analyses for an independent, necessarily approximate, determination of the lattice contribution, which is subtracted from the total specific heat to obtain the electron contribution. It eliminates the uncertainties and errors in the electron contribution that follow from the approximations in the determination of the lattice contribution. Our values of the parameters characteristic of the electron contribution differ significantly from those obtained in conventional analyses of specific-heat data for five similar hole-doped BaFe$_{2}$As$_{2}$ superconductors, which also differ significantly among themselves. They show that the electron density of states is comprised of contributions from two electron bands with superconducting-state energy gaps that differ by a factor 3.8, with 77$\%$ coming from the band with the larger gap. The variation of the specific heat with magnetic field is consistent with extended $s$-wave pairing, one of the theoretical predictions. The relation between the densities of states and the energy gaps in the two bands is not consistent with a theoretical model based on interband interactions alone. Comparison of the normal-state density of states with band-structure calculations shows an extraordinarily large effective mass enhancement, for which there is no precedent in similar materials and no theoretical explanation.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.