Paper detail

Why $T_c$ of (CaFeAs)$_{10}$Pt$_{3.58}$As$_8$ is twice as high as (CaFe$_{0.95}$Pt$_{0.05}$As)$_{10}$Pt$_3$As$_8$

Recently discovered (CaFe$_{1-x}$Pt$_x$As)$_{10}$Pt$_3$As$_8$ and (CaFeAs)$_{10}$Pt$_{4-y}$As$_8$ superconductors are very similar materials having the same elemental composition and structurally similar superconducting FeAs slabs. Yet the maximal critical temperature achieved by changing Pt concentration is approximately twice higher in the latter. Using angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy(ARPES) we compare the electronic structure of their optimally doped compounds and find drastic differences. Our results highlight the sensitivity of critical temperature to the details of fermiology and point to the decisive role of band-edge singularities in the mechanism of high-$T_c$ superconductivity.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 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.