Abstract
In order to elucidate pressure-induced second superconducting phase (SC-II) in AxFe2−ySe2 (A = K, Rb, Cs, and Tl) having an intrinsic phase separation, we perform a detailed high-pressure magnetotransport study on the isoelectronic, phase-pure (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe single crystals. Here we show that its ambient-pressure superconducting phase (SC-I) with a critical temperature Tc ≈ 40 K is suppressed gradually to below 2 K and an SC-II phase emerges above Pc ≈ 5 GPa with Tc increasing progressively to above 50 K up to 12.5 GPa. Our high-precision resistivity data uncover a sharp transition of the normal state from Fermi liquid for SC-I to non-Fermi liquid for SC-II phase. In addition, the reemergence of high-Tc SC-II is found to accompany with a concurrent enhancement of electron carrier density. Without structural transition below 10 GPa, the observed SC-II with enhanced carrier density should be ascribed to an electronic origin presumably associated with pressure-induced Fermi surface reconstruction.
The understanding of the reemergence of pressure induced superconductivity in alkali-metal intercalated FeSe is hampered by sample complexities. Here, Sun et al. report the electronic properties of (Li1–xFex)OHFe1–ySe single crystal not only in the reemerged superconducting state but also in the normal state.
Introduction
Among the iron-based superconductors, the structural simplest FeSe and its derived materials have attracted tremendous attention recently due to its peculiar electronic properties and the great tunability of the superconducting transition temperature Tc. The bulk FeSe displays a relatively low Tc ≈ 8.5 K within the peculiar nonmagnetic nematic phase below Ts ≈ 90 K1. By intercalating some alkali-metal ions, ammonia, or organic molecules in between the adjacent FeSe layers, such as in AxFe2−ySe2 (A = K, Rb, Cs, and Tl)2,3, Ax(NH3)yFeSe4, and (Li,Fe)OHFeSe5,6, high-Tc superconductivity with Tc above 30–40 K has been successfully achieved. More surprisingly, when a single unit-cell FeSe film is fabricated on the SrTiO3 substrate, its Tc can be raised up to 65–100 K7,8. Here we refer these high-Tc superconductors derived directly from FeSe as the SC-I phase. The superconducting mechanism for these SC-I phases has been subjected to extensive investigations, and the observed common Fermi surface (FS) topology consisting of only electron pocket in the Brillouin zone corners suggests that the electron doping plays an essential role for achieving high Tc9–11, in agreement with the gate-voltage regulation experiments on the FeSe flakes12.
Starting from the SC-I phase in AxFe2−ySe2, Sun et al.13. had reported a pressure-induced sudden reemergence of a second superconducting phase (denoted as SC-II hereafter) with higher Tc up to 48.7 K above ~10 GPa. A similar SC-II phase has also been observed in Cs0.4(NH3)yFeSe under high pressure14. Although the reemergence of SC-II phase with higher Tc is quite intriguing and different pairing symmetry has been proposed theoretically15, the intrinsic superconducting- and normal-state properties have been poorly characterized so far due to some sample and technical difficulties. For example, AxFe2−ySe2 superconductors are prone to phase separation accompanied with the intergrowth of antiferromagnetic insulating A2Fe4Se5 phase16. In addition, only polycrystalline samples have been studied under pressure for Cs0.4(NH3)yFeSe, which is extremely sensitive to air14. Moreover, high-pressure technique capable of both large pressure capacity and good hydrostaticity is required in order to obtain reliable superconducting- and normal-state properties. Therefore, these complexities have hampered a proper understanding on the intriguing SC-II phase of these FeSe-derived systems.
In order to approach this intriguing problem, we turn our attention to the recently discovered (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe5,6, which is free from phase separation, relatively stable in air, and more importantly, can be obtained in high-quality single crystals via a specially designed hydrothermal ion-exchange method17. (Li0.84Fe0.16)OHFeSe with an optimal Tc ≈ 41 K is heavily electron doped having only electron pockets at the Brillouin zone corners, similar as AxFe2−ySe2 and monolayer FeSe/SrTiO3 film10,18. In addition, the distance between two adjacent FeSe layers in (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe is much larger than that in bulk FeSe and AxFe2−ySe2, which signals a weak interlayer interaction and an enhanced two-dimensional nature of the electronic structure19. It thus has been considered as a better proxy of the monolayer FeSe film but is more stable and free from interface effects10. These factors together make it indispensable to perform a high-pressure study on (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe single crystals.
Here we report detailed magnetotransport measurements on the (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe single crystals under hydrostatic pressures up to 12.5 GPa with a cubic anvil cell (CAC) apparatus20. We find that the ambient-pressure SC-I phase is suppressed gradually with increasing pressure to Pc ≈ 5 GPa, above which a new SC-II phase with higher Tc over 50 K emerges gradually. Importantly, our high-precision resistivity data enable us to uncover a sharp transition of the normal state from Fermi liquid for SC-I to non-Fermi liquid for SC-II phase. In addition, the reemergence of higher Tc SC-II phase is found to accompany with a concurrent enhancement of electron carrier density. Such information was unavailable in previous high-pressure studies on the FeSe-derived superconductors. The present work thus provides positive correlations between the high-Tc superconductivity in SC-II with a FS reconstruction, which is not induced by a structural transition as confirmed by our high-pressure structural study.
Results
High-pressure resistivity
Figure 1a shows the temperature dependence of resistivity ρ(T) for a (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe single crystal (x ≈ 0.16, y ≈ 0.02, and Tc ≈ 40 K at ambient pressure) measured under various hydrostatic pressures up to 12.5 GPa in the whole temperature range. As can be seen, ρ(T) in the normal state first decreases significantly and then becomes nearly unchanged above 6.5 GPa; the broad hump feature at high temperature also smears out gradually upon increasing pressure. The superconducting Tc displays a non-monotonic variation with pressure, which can be seen more clearly from the vertically shifted ρ(T) data below 100 K as shown in Fig. 1b. Here we define the onset Tconset (down-pointing arrow) as the temperature where ρ(T) starts to deviate from the extrapolated normal-state behavior, and determine Tczero (up-pointing arrow) as the zero-resistivity temperature. As can be seen, upon increasing pressure to 5 GPa, Tconset is suppressed gradually to ~13 K and Tczero can hardly be defined down to 1.4 K, the lowest temperature in the present study. Interestingly, when increasing pressure to 6.5 GPa, a broad superconducting transition appears again with the Tconset raised to ~31 K and Tczero at ~12 K, thus evidencing the emergence of the SC-II phase. With further increasing pressure, both Tconset and Tczero move up progressively and the superconducting transition becomes sharper. Finally, Tconset and Tczero reach 52.7 and 46.2 K, respectively, at Pmax = 12.5 GPa. A closer inspection of the ρ(T) data in Fig. 1b also reveals a gradual evolution of the temperature dependence of normal-state resistivity under pressure, which will be discussed in detailed below.
AC magnetic susceptibility
The superconducting transitions have been further verified by the AC magnetic susceptibility 4πχ(T) shown in Fig. 1c, in which the superconducting diamagnetic signal appears below Tcχ as indicated by the arrows. The obtained Tcχ first decreases with pressure, reverses the trend near Pc ≈ 5 GPa, and then increases quickly with further increasing pressure, in well agreement with the resistivity data. In addition, the transition in 4πχ(T) is broad when the resistivity transition is broad for 5 < P < 8 GPa. Nevertheless, the superconducting shielding volume reaching over 60–70% confirmed the bulk nature of the observed superconductivity in both SC-I and SC-II phases.
Temperature-pressure phase diagram
The pressure dependences of the obtained Tconset, Tczero, and Tcχ for the studied (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe are displayed in Fig. 2a, which evidenced explicitly the gradual suppression of the SC-I phase followed by the reemergence of the SC-II phase above Pc ≈ 5 GPa. Such an evolution of superconducting phases is clearly different from that of bulk FeSe under high pressure21,22. It looks that the SC-II phase will exhibit a dome-shaped Tc(P) with the maximum taking place around 12–13 GPa. It is interesting to note that in the SC-I region Tcχ agrees well with Tczero as commonly seen in most superconductors, whereas in the SC-II region Tcχ follows the Tconset, implying that a considerable superconducting volume already appears near Tconset despite of a broad transition. Although the observation of pressure-induced SC-II phase in (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe in the present study is qualitatively similar with those reported in AxFe2−ySe2 and Cs0.4(NH3)yFeSe13,14, there are some quantitative differences in comparison with those previously studies: (i) the obtained Tconset here is higher, exceeding 50 K for the first time; (ii) Tczero that has never been achieved for the SC-II phase in the previous studies using the diamond anvil cell (DAC) is successfully reached here due to a better sample quality and improved hydrostaticity in the CAC; (iii) the SC-II phase appears gradually and exists in a wide pressure range. We have measured another (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe sample with a lower Tc ≈ 28 K at ambient pressure and observed very similar behaviors featured by two superconducting domes separated at a lower critical pressure of Pc ≈ 3 GPa. Details can be found in the Supplementary Fig. 1. These experiments thus confirm that the pressure-induced reemergence of SC-II phase is likely a universal phenomenon in the (Li−1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe system, or even in the FeSe-derived high-Tc superconductors taking together the previous studies 13,14.
Transition from Fermi liquid to non-Fermi liquid around Pc
To uncover the origin of such an intriguing phenomenon, experimentally we need to first characterize the normal-state properties, which are usually correlated tightly with the superconducting states for unconventional superconductors. A distinct change on the temperature dependence of normal-state ρ(T) has already been noticed in Fig. 1b. To quantify this evolution, we display the ρ(T) data in a double-logarithmic plot of log(ρ − ρ0) vs. logT in Fig. 3a, where ρ0 is the residual resistivity at zero temperature. The slope of these curves corresponds to the resistivity exponent α in ρ ∝ Tα, which evolves from a Fermi-liquid α = 2 for 0.7 ≤ P ≤ 4 GPa, through some intermediate 1.5 < α < 2 for P = 5 and 6.5 GPa, and finally to non-Fermi-liquid α ≤ 1.5 for P > 6.5 GPa. Such an evolution can be visualized more profoundly in a contour plot of the resistivity exponent α ≡ dlog(ρ − ρ0)/dlogT superimposed in Fig. 2a. The observed sharp transition of normal-state behavior thus signals distinct superconducting states for the SC-I and SC-II phases. In particular, the nearly linear-in-T behavior for the SC-II phase resembles those of the optimal doped cuprates and iron-pnictides superconductors, thus implying an unconventional mechanism for the emergent SC-II phase23. We want to underline that our high-precision resistivity data enable us to unveil the non-Fermi-liquid normal state of the SC-II phase for the first time.
Enhanced carrier density above Pc
In order to gain further insights into the peculiar non-Fermi-liquid behavior of SC-II phase, we tried to probe the electronic structure information via measurements of magnetoresistance (MR) and Hall effect under pressure. Figure 3b, c displays the field dependence of in-plane MR(H) ≡ [ρ(H)/ρ(0) − 1] × 100% and Hall resistivity ρxy(H) in the normal state just above Tc under various pressures up to 8 GPa. As can be seen, the MR is small and decreases gradually from 3% at 0.7 GPa to below 0.5% at 8 GPa. All ρxy(H) curves exhibit a linear-in-H behavior with a negative slope, signaling that the electron-type carriers dominate the charge transport in both the SC-I and SC-II phases. This observation also distinguishes the SC-II phase of (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe from the high-Tc phase of FeSe under high pressure showing the hole-dominated charge transport. In contrast with the monotonic decrease of MR, ρxy displays a non-monotonic variation with pressure. Here we obtained the Hall coefficient RH ≡ dρxy/dH as the slope of a linear fitting to ρxy(H), and plotted the pressure dependence of RH(P) in Fig. 2b. As can be seen, RH is negative, and its magnitude first increases slightly with pressure and then experiences a quick reduction above 4 GPa. Assuming a simple one-band contribution, the electron-type carrier density can be estimated as ne = −1/(RH·e). As shown in Fig. 2b, ne takes a relatively constant value of ~2 × 1027 m−3 within the SC-I region for P < 5 GPa, above which it increases linearly to a large value of ~9 × 1027 m−3 at 8 GPa, tracking nicely the trend of Tc(P). These results demonstrate that the emergence of SC-II phase with higher Tc is accompanied with a concurrent enhancement of electron carrier density. Such a positive correlation between Tc and ne is consistent with the observations in the FeSe-based superconductors as mentioned above, but the origin of the pressure-induced enhancement of ne in the SC-II phase deserves in-depth investigations.
High-pressure synchrotron X-ray diffraction
To this end, we first checked if a structural transition takes place near Pc ≈ 5 GPa. Figure 4a displays the high-pressure synchrotron X-ray diffraction (SXRD) patterns of (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe measured at room temperature up to 14 GPa. All the peaks can be indexed in the tetragonal P4/nmm (No. 129) space group plus a trace amount of Selenium (Se) secondary phase (space group P3121) with the main peak located near ~12°. As can be seen, no obvious structural transition can be discerned in the investigated pressure range. The relative peak intensities are altered when applying pressure above 0.8 GPa due to the development of preferred orientation, as exemplified by the (200) peak near 20°. In addition to the preferred orientation, the presence of light elements H, O, and Li, and the significant peak broadening has hampered reliable Rietveld structural refinements on these SXRD data. We thus have applied the LeBail fit to the SXRD patterns and extracted the unit-cell parameters as a function of pressure as depicted in Fig. 4b–d. As can be seen, both the lattice parameters a, c, and the unit-cell volume V decrease smoothly up to 10 GPa, above which a and c experiences some abnormal variations. Given a larger compressibility of the c axis, the c/a ratio decreases monotonically at least up to 10 GPa, Fig. 4c, which cannot explain the non-monotonic variations of Tc(P) shown in Fig. 2a24. Since the SXRD peaks become relatively broad above 10 GPa due to the solidification of liquid pressure transmitting medium, the anomalous structure changes above 10 GPa deserve further studies with better resolved SXRD patterns by employing the gas pressure transmitting medium. But, our present high-pressure structural study rules out any structural transition below 10 GPa as the possible cause for the observed enhancement of carrier density and the emergence of SC-II phase.
Discussion
Without a structural transition taking place at Pc ≈ 5 GPa, we are left with an electronic origin for the observed SC-II phase. Unfortunately, a direct experimental probe of the electronic structure near FS, e.g., with angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES), is impossible under high pressure. We then resorted to first-principles calculations as a function of pressure to check changes in the electronic structure. As detailed in the Supplementary Note 1, however, the calculated electronic structures up to 10 GPa do not show obvious changes related to our experimental findings here. Such a failed effort might arise from the fact that the band structural calculations cannot properly reproduce the experimentally observed FSs in (Li,Fe)OHFeSe via ARPES10. We need more dedicated calculations to address this issue in the future. Below we discuss briefly some possibilities that could lead to a FS reconstruction under pressure.
Recently, a second high-Tc dome and a second enhancement of superconductivity have been reported in the heavily K-deposed FeSe film grown on SiC25 and the SrTiO3 substrates26, respectively. By taking advantage of the in-situ ARPES measurements, the second enhancement of superconductivity in the latter case has been attributed to a Lifshitz transition associated with the emergence of an electron pocket at the Γ point of Brillouin zone center26. Similarly, a second superconducting dome was also reported very recently in the surface K-dosed (Li0.8Fe0.2)OHFeSe27, and was ascribed to emergent electron pocket at the Γ point. But the obtained Tc is much lower than that of SC-II observed here under high pressure. Since no extra electron carriers were purposely doped into (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe in the present case, the dramatic enhancement of carrier density ne and Tc above 5 GPa cannot be ascribed to a doping-induced Lifshitz transition. Some other factors might play a role at high pressure. On the one hand, the magnetism of the (Li,Fe)OH layer could be suppressed by pressure, releasing some charge carriers into the FeSe layer. However, such a scenario is unlikely since the reemergence of SC-II phase has been observed universally in different classes of FeSe-derived systems. Alternatively, a Lifshitz transition in the heavily electron-doped FeSe layers might take place via a pressure-induced FS reconstruction. Recent scanning tunneling spectroscopy study on the (Li1−xFex)OHFeSe single crystal has identified two electron pockets at the M point associated with the dxy and dxz/dyz orbitals, respectively28. The observed (π, 0.67π) wave vector in the spin resonance spectroscopy with inelastic neutron scattering is consistent with the nesting vector between the two-dimensional electron Fermi pockets29. Whether these electron pockets at M point undergo reconstruction or another electron/hole pockets emerge near Γ point deserve further theoretical studies. According to a recent ARPES study on FeSe films by Phan et al.30, a compression strain realized in FeSe/CaF2 will enlarge significantly both the hole and electron FSs in comparison with the strain-free FeSe. It is thus possible that compression on the FeSe planes above the critical pressure Pc can result in a FS reconstruction leading to a larger FS volume. In any case, the reemergence of higher Tc SC-II phase developed from the unusual non-Fermi-liquid normal state with enhanced electronic carrier density outlines important constrains for further investigations.
Finally, it is noteworthy that the normal-state resistivity of the cuprate superconductors, e.g., the overdoped La2−xSrxCuO4 and La2−xCexCuO431,32, behaves as ρ(T) ~ T1.6 at the verge of the superconducting dome, which has been attributed to quantum criticality. The observation of similar power-law behavior near the border of SC-II dome in the present (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe thus points to the common physics that awaits for in-depth explorations in future.
In summary, we have measured the resistivity of (Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe single crystal under hydrostatic pressures up to 12.5 GPa with a CAC apparatus, and observed a gradual suppression of superconductivity followed by reemergence of a high-Tc SC-II phase above Pc ≈ 5 GPa. The highest Tc reaches ~52 K, which is the highest among the bulk form of FeSe-derived superconductors. The SC-II phase is confirmed to develop from a peculiar non-Fermi-liquid normal state featured by dominant electron-type charge carriers and enhanced carrier density. Since no any structural transition was detected below 10 GPa, the observed SC-II phase with enhanced carrier density should be ascribed to an electronic origin associated with FS remonstration.
Methods
Sample preparation
(Li1−xFex)OHFe1−ySe single crystals used in the present study were grown with a hydrothermal ion-exchange technique by using a large insulating K0.8Fe1.6Se2 crystal as a matrix. Details about the crystal growth and sample characterizations at ambient pressure can be found in the previous study17.
High-pressure resistivity and AC magnetic susceptibility
High-pressure transport and AC magnetic susceptibility were performed in the palm CAC apparatus20. The standard four-probe method was employed for resistivity measurement with the current applied within the ab plane and the magnetic field along the c axis. The ρxy(H) and ρxx(H) data were anti-symmetrized (symmetrized) with respect to the magnetic field between +5 and −5 T. Glycerol was employed as the pressure transmitting medium. The pressure values inside the CAC were calibrated at room temperature by observing the characteristic transitions of bismuth. The mutual induction method was used for the AC magnetic susceptibility measurements.
High-pressure SXRD
High-pressure SXRD was measured with DAC at the BL15U1 beamline, Shanghai Synchrotron Radiation Facility of China. Glycerol was used as the pressure medium. The pressure in DAC was monitored with the ruby fluorescence method.
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.
Electronic supplementary material
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the National Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11574377, 11574370, and U1530402), the National Basic Research Program of China (Grant Nos. 2014CB921500, 2017YFA0303000, and 2016YFA0300301), and the Strategic Priority Research Program and Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant Nos. XDB07020100, QYZDB-SSW-SLH013, QYZDY-SSW-SLH001, and QYZDY-SSW-SLH008). Y.U. is supported by the JSPS KAKENHI (Grant No. 15H03681). The authors would like to thank Dr. Aiguo Li and Dr. Ke Yang for technical support at the BL15U1 beamline, Shanghai Synchrotron Radiation Facility of China.
Author contributions
J.-G.C. and X.L.D. conceived the project. H.X.Z., Y.L.H., S.L.N., K.J., F.Z., X.L.D. and Z.X.Z. synthesized the (Li,Fe)OHFeSe single crystals. J.P.S., P.S., K.Y.C., B.S.W., Y.U. and J.-G.C. performed the high-pressure resistivity and AC magnetic susceptibility measurements with the cubic anvil cell apparatus. J.P.S., N.N.L., K.Z. and W.G.Y. measured high-pressure SXRD. G.X., J.S., D.J.S., and G.M.Z. performed theoretical calculations and analyses on the electronic structures under pressure. All authors discussed the results. J.P.S. and J.-G.C. wrote the paper with inputs from all authors.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Footnotes
J. P. Sun, P. Shahi, and H. X. Zhou contributed equally to this work.
Electronic supplementary material
Supplementary Information accompanies this paper at 10.1038/s41467-018-02843-7.
Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Contributor Information
X. L. Dong, Email: dong@iphy.ac.cn
J.-G. Cheng, Email: jgcheng@iphy.ac.cn
References
- 1.Hsu FC, et al. Superconductivity in the PbO-type structure α-FeSe. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2008;105:14262–14264. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0807325105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Guo, J. G. et al. Superconductivity in the iron selenide KxFe2Se2 (0 ≤ x ≤ 1.0). Phys. Rev. B82, 180520(R) (2010).
- 3.Wang HD, et al. Superconductivity at 32 K and anisotropy in Tl0.58Rb0.42Fe1.72Se2 crystals. Europhys. Lett. 2011;93:47004. doi: 10.1209/0295-5075/93/47004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Scheidt EW, et al. Superconductivity at Tc=44 K in LixFe2Se2(NH3)y. Eur. Phys. J. B. 2012;85:279. doi: 10.1140/epjb/e2012-30422-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Lu XF, et al. Coexistence of superconductivity and antiferromagnetism in (Li0.8Fe0.2)OHFeSe. Nat. Mater. 2015;14:325–329. doi: 10.1038/nmat4155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Dong X, et al. Phase diagram of (Li1-xFex)OHFeSe: a bridge between iron selenide and arsenide superconductors. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015;137:66–69. doi: 10.1021/ja511292f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Wang QY, et al. Interface-induced high-temperature superconductivity in single unit-cell FeSe films on SrTiO3. Chin. Phys. Lett. 2012;29:037402. doi: 10.1088/0256-307X/29/3/037402. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ge JF, et al. Superconductivity above 100 K in single-layer FeSe films on doped SrTiO3. Nat. Mater. 2015;14:285–289. doi: 10.1038/nmat4153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Liu X, et al. Dichotomy of the electronic structure and superconductivity between single-layer and double-layer FeSe/SrTiO3 films. Nat. Commun. 2014;5:5047. doi: 10.1038/ncomms6047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Zhao L, et al. Common electronic origin of superconductivity in (Li,Fe)OHFeSe bulk superconductor and single-layer FeSe/SrTiO3 films. Nat. Commun. 2016;7:10608. doi: 10.1038/ncomms10608. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Qian T, et al. Absence of a holelike fermi surface for the iron-based K0.8F1.7Se2 superconductor revealed by angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011;106:187001. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.187001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Lei B, et al. Evolution of high-temperature superconductivity from a low-Tc phase tuned by carrier concentration in FeSe thin flakes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016;116:077002. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.077002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Sun L, et al. Re-emerging superconductivity at 48 kelvin in iron chalcogenides. Nature. 2012;483:67–69. doi: 10.1038/nature10813. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Izumi M, et al. Emergence of double-dome superconductivity in ammoniated metal-doped FeSe. Sci. Rep. 2015;5:9477. doi: 10.1038/srep09477. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Das T, Balatsky AV. Origin of pressure induced second superconducting dome in AyFe2−xSe2 [A=K, (Tl,Rb)] New. J. Phys. 2013;15:093045. doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/15/9/093045. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Chen F, et al. Electronic identification of the parental phases and mesoscopic phase separation of KxFe2−ySe2 superconductors. Phys. Rev. X. 2011;1:021020. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Dong X, et al. (Li0.84Fe0.16)OHFe0.98Se superconductor: ion-exchange synthesis of large single-crystal and highly two-dimensional electron properties. Phys. Rev. B. 2015;92:064515. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.064515. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Liu X, et al. Electronic structure and superconductivity of FeSe-related superconductors. J. Phys. Condens. Matter. 2015;27:183201. doi: 10.1088/0953-8984/27/18/183201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Vivanco HK, Rodriguez EE. The intercalation chemistry of layered iron chalcogenide superconductors. J. Solid State Chem. 2016;242:3–21. doi: 10.1016/j.jssc.2016.04.008. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Cheng JG, et al. Integrated-fin gasket for palm cubic-anvil high pressure apparatus. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2014;85:093907. doi: 10.1063/1.4896473. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Medvedev S, et al. Electronic and magnetic phase diagram of β-Fe1.01Se with superconductivity at 36.7 K under pressure. Nat. Mater. 2009;8:630–633. doi: 10.1038/nmat2491. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Sun JP, et al. Dome-shaped magnetic order competing with high-temperature superconductivity at high pressures in FeSe. Nat. Commun. 2016;7:12146. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12146. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Das T, Panagopoulos C. Two types of superconducting domes in unconventional superconductors. New. J. Phys. 2016;18:103033. doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/18/10/103033. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zhou XQ, et al. The preparation and phase diagram of (7Li1-xFexOD)FeSe and (Li1-xFexOH)FeSe superconducotrs. J. Mater. Chem. C. 2016;4:3934–3941. doi: 10.1039/C5TC04041H. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Song CL, et al. Observation of double-dome superconductivity in potassium-doped FeSe thin films. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016;116:157001. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.157001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Shi X, et al. Enhanced superconductivity accompanying a Lifshitz transition in electron-doped FeSe monolayer. Nat. Commun. 2017;8:14988. doi: 10.1038/ncomms14988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Ren MQ, et al. Superconductivity across Lifshitz transition and anomalous insulating state in surface K-dosed (Li0.8Fe0.2OH)FeSe. Sci. Adv. 2017;3:e1603238. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1603238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Du Z, et al. Scrutinizing the double superconducting gaps and strong coupling pairing in (Li1-xFex)OHFeSe. Nat. Commun. 2016;7:10565. doi: 10.1038/ncomms10565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Davies NR, et al. Spin resonance in the superconducting state of Li1−xFexODFe1−ySe observed by neutron spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. B. 2016;94:144503. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.144503. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Phan GN, et al. Effects of strain on the electronic structure, superconductivity, and nematicity in FeSe studied by angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. B. 2017;95:224507. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.224507. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Cooper RA, et al. Anomalous criticality in the electrical resistivity of La2-xSrxCuO4. Science. 2009;323:603–607. doi: 10.1126/science.1165015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Jin K, Butch NP, Kirshenbaum K, Paglione J, Greene RL. Linke between spin fluctuations and electron pairing in copper oxide superconductors. Nature. 2011;476:73–75. doi: 10.1038/nature10308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.