Skip to main content
NIST Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIST Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jun 15.
Published in final edited form as: Phys Rev B. 2019 Dec;100(22):10.1103/PhysRevB.100.220504. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.100.220504

Point-node gap structure of the spin-triplet superconductor UTe2

Tristin Metz 1, Seokjin Bae 1, Sheng Ran 1,2, I-Lin Liu 1,2,3, Yun Suk Eo 1, Wesley T Fuhrman 1, Daniel F Agterberg 4, Steven M Anlage 1,3, Nicholas P Butch 1,2, Johnpierre Paglione 1,3,5,*
PMCID: PMC8204512  NIHMSID: NIHMS1670422  PMID: 34136735

Abstract

Low-temperature electrical and thermal transport, magnetic penetration depth, and heat capacity measurements were performed on single crystals of the actinide superconductor UTe2 to determine the structure of the superconducting energy gap. Heat transport measurements performed with currents directed along both crystallographic a and b axes reveal a vanishingly small residual fermionic component of the thermal conductivity. The magnetic field dependence of the residual term follows a rapid, quasilinear increase consistent with the presence of nodal quasiparticles, rising toward the a-axis upper critical field where the Wiedemann-Franz law is recovered. Together with a quadratic temperature dependence of the magnetic penetration depth up to T/Tc = 0.3, these measurements provide evidence for an unconventional spin-triplet superconducting order parameter with point nodes. Millikelvin specific heat measurements performed on the same crystals used for thermal transport reveal an upturn below 300 mK that is well described by a divergent quantum-critical contribution to the density of states (DOS). Modeling this contribution with a T−1/3 power law allows restoration of the full entropy balance in the superconducting state and a resultant cubic power law for the electronic DOS below Tc, consistent with the point-node gap structure determined by thermal conductivity and penetration depth measurements.


The uranium-based superconductors URhGe, UCoGe, and UGe2 have generated much interest due to the unusual coexistence of a ferromagnetic ground state with superconductivity present in all three systems [1]. Recently, the discovery of superconductivity in UTe2 [2] has stimulated a flurry of experimental studies on this new actinide superconductor [27]. With a ground state close to ferromagnetic order as evidenced by quantum critical scaling of the magnetization [2] and magnetic fluctuations down to millikelvin temperatures [7], the UTe2 system adds the long-sought paramagnetic end member to the family of uranium-based ferromagnetic superconductors.

The superconducting state of UTe2 is quite exotic. Strong evidence for spin-triplet pairing is given by a lack of change in the NMR Knight shift upon cooling into the superconducting state, and an upper critical field Hc2 that exceeds the paramagnetic limit for all field directions (i.e., by more than an order of magnitude for Hb) [2]. The NMR 1/T1 relaxation time and the heat capacity were also observed to exhibit power-law behavior consistent with point nodes in the gap structure [2]. Furthermore, a reentrant superconducting phase was shown to develop in extremely high magnetic fields [4]. Intriguingly, heat capacity measurements in the superconducting state have consistently exhibited an apparent residual fermionic (T-linear) term that appears to equal ∼50% of the normal-state electronic density of states (DOS) [2,3], which has been interpreted as a signature of an unpaired fluid. However, this picture is problematic since a nonunitary pairing state is not formally possible given the orthorhombic crystal symmetry. More important, the entropy balance between normal and superconducting states that is required for a second-order transition (i.e., 0TcCelsTdT0TcγndT, where Cels is the electronic heat capacity in the superconducting state and γn is the normal-state electronic heat capacity) is not obeyed [2,3].

Here, we use thermal conductivity and penetration depth measurements to probe the superconducting gap structure directly by observing the properties of low-energy quasiparticle excitations. Thermal conductivity κ has been established as a powerful directional tool for probing the gap structure of unconventional superconductors [8], and magnetic penetration depth is a well-established tool for finding detailed information about the pairing state [9]. In our thermal transport measurements, we observe a residual quasiparticle contribution which is vanishingly small in the zero-field limit, but is restored by magnetic field much more quickly than would be expected for either clean- or dirty-limit fully gapped superconductivity. Together with a quadratic temperature dependence of the measured magnetic penetration depth, our observations are consistent with a point-node superconducting gap structure in UTe2. We also present measurements of the specific heat of the same samples used for thermal transport in order to probe the reported residual DOS in the superconducting state. We observe a low-temperature upturn in the T-linear term that is not consistent with a nuclear Schottky contribution, but rather a divergent term consistent with the presence of quantum critical degrees of freedom. Upon subtraction of the divergent term, we recover a complete entropy balance between superconducting and normal states in the electronic specific heat and the previously observed T3 dependence [2,3].

Single crystals of UTe2 were synthesized using a vapor transport method as described in Ref. [2], using depleted uranium (>99.9% 238U) and natural abundance elemental 127.60Te (99.9999% purity). Crystals were shaped into rectangular plates with sample dimensions 1.5 × 0.5 × 0.1 mm3 for the current ja sample (S1) and 1.8 × 1.0 × 0.3 mm3 for the jb sample (S2), used for both thermal conductivity and specific heat measurements. Thermal conductivity κ was measured in a dilution refrigerator using a modular one-heater, two-thermometer probe [10], with contacts made by soldering gold wire leads with an In-Sn alloy to evaporated gold pads, resulting in ∼mΩ contact resistances. Electrical resistivity ρ was measured in situ using the same wires and contacts, with samples in the exact position used for thermal transport measurements. Both samples exhibit a residual resistance ratio ρ(300 K)/ρ(0 K) of 22. Tc values of 1.7 K (1.6 K) and Hc2values of 6.2 T (6.5 T) were obtained for S1 (S2) from the in situ resistivity measurements. The resistive Tc values are consistent with Tc measured via heat capacity (Fig. 4). As discussed below, the observation of the Wiedemann-Franz (WF) law in the field-induced normal state confirms the quality of measurements and rules out electron-phonon decoupling issues [11]. Measurements of the low-temperature magnetic penetration depth (λ) were performed using a dielectric resonator technique [12] on two other crystals, labeled S3 and S4, and heat capacity C of samples S1 and S2 was measured using the relaxation time method.

FIG. 4.

FIG. 4.

Analysis of the low-temperature heat capacity of UTe2 single-crystal samples S1 and S2 (same crystals used for thermal transport measurements). (a) The total measured heat capacity (open circles) of sample S1 decomposed into a weak power-law divergence (dashed line), phonon term (dashed-dotted line), and electronic heat capacity (solid circles) obtained by subtracting the diverging and phonon terms (see text for details). (b) The obtained electronic heat capacities of samples S1 and S2 plotted vs T2. Solid lines are fits to the T2 dependence in the superconducting state with Tc determined by balancing entropy.

The superconducting state in UTe2 has been proposed [24] to be a spin triplet based on several experimental observations. Theoretically, because UTe2 has an orthorhombic lattice that is symmorphic as confirmed at low temperatures by neutron scattering [13], Blount’s theorem must hold [14] so that odd-parity (i.e., spin-triplet) states will either have point nodes or be fully gapped. Conversely, even-parity (spin-singlet) states will have either line nodes or be fully gapped. More formally, assuming strong spin-orbit coupling and invoking the D2H point group yields the possible gap symmetries shown in Table I. The possible symmetry-imposed nodal structures fall into three types: fully gapped (A1g, A1u), axial point nodes (B1u, B2u, B3u with pairs of point nodes along a single high-symmetry axis), or polar line nodes (B1g, B2g, B3g with line nodes perpendicular to a single high-symmetry axis).

TABLE 1.

Candidate superconducting pairing states for the D2h point group symmetry.

Representation Representative function Nodes
A1g const+cxkx2+cyky2+czkz2 None
B1g ckzky Lines
B2g ckzkx Lines
B3g ckxky Lines
A1u cxkxx^+cykyy^+czkzz^ None
B1u c1kyz^+c2kxy^ Points
B2u c1kxz^+c2kzx^ Points
B3u c1kxy^+c2kyx^ Points

Thermal conductivity is a directional probe that can be used to determine the momentum space position of nodes by studying low-energy quasiparticle excitations—as a function of field angle, as shown in the cuprate superconductor YBa2Cu3O7−x (YBCO) [15,16] and heavy fermion compound CeCoIn5 [17], or as a function of the directional current as shown in UPt3 [18,19] and CeIrIn5 [20]. Furthermore, the magnetic field evolution of the electronic thermal conductivity in the T = 0 limit [κ0(H)] is a reliable probe of both nodal gaps (e.g., UPt3[18] and KFe2As2 [21]) and multiband or anisotropic gap superconductors [22].

Figure 1(a) presents the total thermal conductivity of UTe2 samples S1 and S2 measured up to 20 K and compared to the estimated (elastic) charge contribution determined using the in situ measured resistivity ρ for each sample and the WF law [i.e., L0/ρ, where L0 = π2/3(kB/e)2], showing that the majority of the thermal conduction in this range is not electronic. This makes distinguishing the quasiparticle contribution to thermal conductivity quite difficult, even within the superconducting regime. For both samples, there is an abrupt increase in κ/T at Tc as highlighted in Figs. 1(b) and 1(c), similar to that observed in CeCoIn5 [23,24] and YBCO [25,26], where it is attributed to a suppression of the scattering of heat carriers (electrons and phonons, respectively) by the opening of the superconducting gap. In the case of UTe2, the enhanced conductivity below Tc is likely due to a combination of electron and phonon carriers being affected by the gap opening, and, more importantly, is an indication of the high crystalline quality of the samples being measured. The rapid suppression of the enhancement in field is likely due to vortex scattering.

FIG. 1.

FIG. 1.

Thermal conductivity of UTe2 samples S1 and S2. (a) Measured thermal conductivity in comparison to the estimated (elastic) charge contribution L0/ρ (solid and dashed lines) determined using the Wiedemann-Franz law and in situ measured electrical resistivities of both samples. L0/ρ(T) is extrapolated below Tc here assuming the resistivity follows the Fermi-liquid temperature dependence ρ = ρ0 + AT2. (b) and (c) present signatures of the superconducting transition in thermal conductivity measurements for (b) ja and (c) jb orientations. The observed increase in κ/T below Tc is thought to arise from a decrease in scattering due to the opening of the superconducting gap, and the suppression with increasing magnetic fields due to vortex scattering.

The nature of the superconducting gap structure can be determined by probing the value of the residual term of κ/T in the T = 0 limit, κ0/T, and its magnetic field dependence [27]. First, we confirm that the WF law is obeyed in the T = 0 limit in the field-induced normal state at 7 T (a axis). To study the zero-field limit, we apply a small field of 50 mT to ensure soldered contacts are not superconducting and extrapolate to T = 0 by fitting the lowest-temperature data to κ/T = κ0/T + ATα with 1 ⩽ α ⩽ 2 and κ0/T ⩾ 0. As shown in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b), we find that κ/T extrapolates to a vanishingly small residual value for both heat current orientations and rapidly rises with temperature. This is inconsistent with the behavior of a fully gapped superconductor [28], which would not conduct heat until at least ∼20% of Tc, and is more consistent with a gap with nodal excitations [27].

FIG. 2.

FIG. 2.

Low-temperature thermal conductivity of UTe2 single-crystal samples (a) S1 and (b) S2, measured with heat current applied along crystallographic a and b axes, respectively, and magnetic fields applied along the a axis. The black × in (a) and (b) represent the converted normal-state charge conductivity L0/ρ measured in situ at 7 T and calculated using the Wiedemann-Franz law. (c) Magnetic field dependence of T → 0 K extrapolated values [κ0/Tκ(T → 0)/T] taken from the data in (a) and (b). Error bars correspond to uncertainty in the extrapolation from fitting to a power law over different temperature windows. For comparison we include data for the elemental clean-limit fully gapped superconductor Nb [29] and clean-limit nodal superconductors UPt3 [18] and KFe2As2 [21]. The inset shows a comparison of the detailed low field dependence of Δκ(H)/ΔκN ≡ [κ(H) − κ(0)]/[κ(7 T) − κ(0)] measured in the field-sweep mode at 100 mK, with the T → 0 extrapolated values from the main panel. (d) Lorenz ratio L/L0 calculated using the ratio of measured quantities κρ/T at 7 T (a) from and (b) to the Lorenz number L0. Linear extrapolations to T = 0 show agreement with L0 to within 8% and 5% for ja and jb, respectively. The inset shows the zero-field anisotropy ratio κ¯=κb/κa normalized to the anisotropy ratio in the normal state κ¯N=κ¯(7T).

To rule out the possibility of a strongly anisotropic but fully gapped scenario, we study the field dependence of κ0/T. For a full gap, quasiparticles remain localized to vortex cores and only contribute to the thermal conductivity for fields exponentially close to Hc2, such as shown for the classic experiment on elemental Nb shown in Fig. 2(c) [29]. For a fully gapped superconductor in the dirty limit, κ0/T increases more quickly in field but still remains exponentially small in the low-field limit [30]. In multiband superconductors with a disparity in gap values, a rapid rise can occur due to a very small field range H* of activated behavior of a small gap Δ1 (i.e., where Δ1/Δ2~H/Hc2 [22,31]). For a nodal gap structure, low-energy quasiparticle excitations are not bound and therefore follow a much stronger field dependence that depends on the specific gap structure (e.g., for line nodes, κ0/TH due to the Volovik effect).

Using the same extrapolation method as above, we plot in Fig. 2(c) the field dependence of κ0a/T and κ0b/T, which both exhibit a rapid quasilinear rise with magnetic field, further confirmed by detailed 100-mK field-sweep measurements shown in the inset of Fig. 2(c). This behavior rules out a fully gapped scenario, including clean-limit and dirty-limit behaviors, and places a strong constraint on the presence of a very small gap (e.g., Δ1Δ2). Furthermore, we note that the temperature dependence of κ/T in the presence of such a small gap should show a very rapid increase at low temperatures (or even an apparent residual term), making the extreme multiband scenario unlikely. Rather, the field dependence of κ0/T in UTe2 is more reminiscent of that of nodal gap superconductors. Similar behavior was observed in line-node superconductors CeIrIn5 [8], Sr2RuO4 [32], and KFe2As2 [21], which are all accompanied by finite residual values in zero field. A line-node (e.g., d-wave) gap is expected to invoke a universal zero-field residual term given by κ0/T=13γNvF2a2μΔ0. Using a conservative upper limit of κ0/T = 0.1 mW/cm/K2 from our experiment together with values 2Δ0 = 3.5kBTc, γN = 100 mJ/mol/K2, and μ = 2 for a standard d-wave gap slope at the nodes (a is order unity) yields υF = 6000 m/s, a very small velocity similar to that of the extremely heavy p-wave superconductor UPt3 [33]. Interestingly, UPt3 exhibits both vanishingly small κ0 in zero field [33] and a linear increase with magnetic field [18], also shown for comparison in Fig. 2(c). Together with this striking similarity, the vanishingly small residual T-linear term and rapid quasilinear rise in magnetic field observed for UTe2 are most consistent with a point-node gap scenario.

Further information can be garnered from the anisotropy ratio κ¯κb/κa, shown in the inset of Fig. 2(d). Normalizing out the normal-state anisotropy by using the ratio κ¯(0.05T)/κ¯(7T), we find the superconducting state anisotropy approaches ∼0.8 in the low-T limit. This not as large as the value (∼0.5) observed in UPt3 [19], a more compelling indicator of point-node direction. Rather, the near-unity anisotropy may arise due to nodal excitations directed in both basal plane directions (e.g., accidental), but will require detailed calculations based on candidate gap structures to draw firm conclusions.

Measurements of the low-temperature magnetic penetration depth were performed using a cylindrical rutile dielectric resonator [34], which facilitates a microwave transmission resonance involving the ab-plane electrodynamic response at ≈11 GHz. The temperature dependence of the resonant frequency Δf0(T ) and the quality factor Q(T) are measured and converted into surface impedance Zs through a geometrical factor estimated from the geometry of the resonator and the nature of the mode [35]. In the local electrodynamic limit, where the mean free path is smaller than the screening length, Zs can be converted to the complex conductivity σ˜=σ1iσ2 of the samples through the local relation Zs=iμ0ω/σ˜ [36]. The effective penetration depth is obtained from the imaginary part of the conductivity σ2=1/μ0ωλeff2(T), which yields λeff(0) = 1126 nm for S3 and 947 nm for S4, both similar to the estimation [λ(0) ≳ 1000 nm] from a recent study [7].

As shown in Fig. 3, the change in screening length, Δλeff(T), exhibits a rapid rise with temperature indicative of low-lying excitations [9]. Fitting Δλeff(T) to a power-law form aTn + b below 0.3Tc yields a quadratic temperature exponent (n = 2.00 ± 0.01 for S3 and n = 1.92 ± 0.01 for S4), consistent with either a dirty-limit line node [37] or axial point-node scenario [38,39]. Considering the observed vanishingly small κ0/T values and their magnetic field dependence, we conclude that the quadratic dependence of Δλeff(T) is more consistent with axial point nodes aligned in the direction of the vector potential. In our setup, the applied microwave magnetic field generates circulating screening currents in the ab plane [12], so that the direction of the axial point nodes is assumed to lie in the ab plane.

FIG. 3.

FIG. 3.

Effective penetration depth of UTe2 samples S3 (red circles) and S4 (blue squares) plotted vs normalized temperature. The solid lines are power-law fits of the form aTn + b, with extracted exponents n = 2.00 for S3 and n = 1.92 for S4. The vertical bars indicate uncertainty for each data set determined by a 5% root-mean-square-error in resonant frequency and quality factor (see text). The inset presents the same data in terms of (T/Tc)2 to illustrate the quadratic temperature dependence, with linear dashed lines as guides.

Concerning previous observations of an apparent residual DOS in specific heat [2,3], our observations of a vanishingly small fermionic component of thermal conductivity in the zero-field, zero-temperature limit are inconsistent with a scenario that entails the presence of a sizable residual nonpaired fluid. To confirm this, Fig. 4 presents the measured specific heat of samples S1 and S2, which are the same crystals used for thermal transport. This measurement reproduces the large residual value in C/T observed in previous experiments [2,3], but uncovers a sharp increase in C/T below about 300 mK. Although it appears similar to a nuclear Schottky anomaly, which arises from the splitting of nuclear spin states, such a contribution (CN) should be negligible since the only isotope with a nuclear spin is 125Te, which is only 7% abundant in natural Te and does not have a nuclear quadrupole moment. Moreover, the observed upturn is much broader than the expected form CN/TT−3. Instead, it is well fit by a weak power-law (C/TT−∼1/3) divergence as described below.

Motivated by this, we fit the total heat capacity over the entire temperature range (i.e., 50 mK to 5 K) using

CT=AphT2+AdivTα+{AscT2,T<Tc,γn,T>Tc. (1)

The result is shown in Fig. 4(a), where the solid line represents the total fit, AphT2 is the phonon heat capacity (dashed-dotted line), AdivTα is the power-law divergence (dashed line) where α = 0.35 (0.33) for S1 (S2), and the last term is the electronic heat capacity which varies as T2 in the superconducting regime (T < Tc) and is constant (γn) above Tc.

The extracted electronic component Cel/T = C/TAphT2AdivTα exhibits a nearly perfect entropy balance between normal and superconducting states, which is reflected by the fit result in Fig. 4(a) where the resultant Tc (set by the entropy balance) matches the data very well. Figure 4(b) shows that the specific heat for both S1 and S2 samples follows a cubic power law (i.e., Cel/TT2) through the superconducting temperature range, consistent with prior fits to raw data above 300 mK [2,3]. While the divergent residual specific heat term requires further investigation, the lack of any sizable contribution to zero-field thermal conduction means that this component arises from either a well-localized DOS, or itinerant fermionic carriers that are heavily scattered in the T → 0 limit.

In conclusion, detailed measurements of thermal conductivity, penetration depth and heat capacity in UTe2 provide evidence for a superconducting gap structure with point nodes. The vanishingly small residual fermionic term in thermal conductivity, together with rapid increases with both temperature and magnetic field in the zero-field, zero-temperature limits, respectively, confirm the presence of low-energy quasiparticle excitations and the proposed nodal gap structure, and rule out an anistropic or multiband full gap scenario. A quadratic temperature dependence of the low-temperature penetration depth is also consistent with a nodal gap structure, with point nodes within or very near the ab plane. Together with consideration of the D2H point group symmetry, these results provide evidence for spin-triplet Cooper pairing in UTe2. The origin of a localized or strongly scattered divergent quantum critical component of the specific heat, which underlies the superconducting state, will require further study to elucidate.

Acknowledgments

Research at the University of Maryland was supported by the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research Award No. FA9550–14-1–0332 (support of T.M.), the US Department of Energy Awards No. DE-SC-0019154 (thermal transport experiments), No. DE-SC-0018788 (microwave experiments), and No. DE-SC-0017931 (support of S.B.), US National Science Foundation Award No. DMR-1410712 (support of S.M.A.), the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation’s EPiQS Initiative through Grant No. GBMF4419 (materials synthesis), NIST, and the Maryland Quantum Materials Center.

References

  • [1].Aoki D, Ishida K, and Flouquet J, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88, 022001 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  • [2].Ran S, Eckberg C, Ding Q-P, Furukawa Y, Metz T, Saha SR, Liu I-L, Zic M, Kim H, Paglione J, and Butch NP, Science 365, 684 (2019). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [3].Aoki D, Nakamura A, Honda F, Li D, Homma Y, Shimizu Y, Sato YJ, Knebe G, Brison J-P, Pourret A, Braithwaite D, Lapertot G, Niu Q, Vali vska M, Harima H, and Flouquet J, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88, 043702 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  • [4].Ran S, Liu I-L, Eo YS, Campbell DJ, Neves PM, Fuhrman WT, Saha SR, Eckberg C, Kim H, Graf D, Balakirev F, Singleton J, Paglione J, and Butch NP, Nat. Phys. 15, 1250 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [5].Niu Q, Knebel G, Braithwaite D, Aoki D, Lapertot G, Seyfarth G, Brison J-P, Flouquet J, and Pourret A, arXiv:1907.11118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [6].Miyake A, Shimizu Y, Sato YJ, Li D, Nakamura A, Homma Y, Honda F, Flouquet J, Tokunaga M, and Aok D, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88, 063706 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  • [7].Sundar S, Gheidi S, Akintola K, Cote AM, Dunsiger SR, Ran S, Butch NP, Saha SR, Paglione J, and Sonier JE, Phys. Rev. B 100, 140502(R) (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [8].Shakeripour H, Petrovic C, and Taillefer L, New J. Phys. 11, 055065 (2009). [Google Scholar]
  • [9].Prozorov R and Giannetta RW, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 19, R41 (2006). [Google Scholar]
  • [10].Tanatar MA, Bondarenko VA, Timmons EI, and Prozorov R, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 013903 (2018). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [11].Smith MF, Paglione J, Walker MB, and Taillefer L, Phys. Rev. B 71, 014506 (2005). [Google Scholar]
  • [12].Bae S, Tan Y, Zhuravel AP, Zhang L, Zeng S, Liu Y, Lograsso TA, Ariando, Venkatesan T, and Anlage SM, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 90, 043901 (2019). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [13].Hutanu V, Deng H, Ran S, Fuhrman WT, Thoma H, and Butch NP, arXiv:1905.04377. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [14].Blount EI, Phys. Rev. B 32, 2935 (1985). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [15].Yu F, Salamon MB, Leggett AJ, Lee WC, and Ginsberg DM, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 5136 (1995). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [16].Aubin H, Behnia K, Ribault M, Gagnon R, and Taillefer L, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2624 (1997). [Google Scholar]
  • [17].Izawa K, Yamaguchi H, Matsuda Y, Shishido H, Settai R, and Onuki Y, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 057002 (2001). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [18].Suderow H, Brison JP, Huxley A, and Flouquet J, J. Low Temp. Phys. 108, 11 (1997). [Google Scholar]
  • [19].Lussier B, Ellman B, and Taillefer L, Phys. Rev. B 53, 5145 (1996). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [20].Shakeripour H, Tanatar MA, Li SY, Petrovic C, and Taillefer L, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 187004 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [21].Reid J.-Ph., Tanatar MA, Juneau-Fecteau A, Gordon RT, de Cotret SR, Doiron-Leyraud N, Saito T, Fukazawa H, Kohori Y, Kihou K, Lee CH, Iyo A, Eisaki H, Prozorov R, and Taillefer L, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 087001 (2012). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [22].Boaknin E, Tanatar MA, Paglione J, Hawthorn D, Ronning F, Hill RW, Sutherland M, Taillefer L, Sonier J, Hayden SM, and Brill JW, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 117003 (2003). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [23].Movshovich R, Jaime M, Thompson JD, Petrovic C, Fisk Z, Pagliuso PG, and Sarrao JL, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5152 (2001). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [24].Tanatar MA, Paglione J, Nakatsuji S, Hawthorn DG, Boaknin E, Hill RW, Ronning F, Sutherland M, Taillefer L, Petrovic C, Canfield PC, and Fisk Z, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 067002 (2005). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [25].Cohn JL, Skelton EF, Wolf SA, Liu JZ, and Shelton RN, Phys. Rev. B 45, 13144(R) (1992). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [26].Yu RC, Salamon MB, Lu JP, and Lee WC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1431 (1992). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [27].Graf MJ, Yip S-K, Sauls JA, and Rainer D, Phys. Rev. B 53, 15147 (1996). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [28].Bardeen J, Rickayzen G, and Tewordt L, Phys. Rev. 113, 982 (1959). [Google Scholar]
  • [29].Lowell J and Sousa JB, J. Low Temp. Phys. 3, 65 (1970). [Google Scholar]
  • [30].Willis JO and Ginsberg DM, Phys. Rev. B 14, 1916 (1976). [Google Scholar]
  • [31].Yamashita M, Nakata N, Senshu Y, Tonegawa S, Ikada K, Hashimoto K, Sugawara H, Shibauchi T, and Matsuda Y, Phys. Rev. B 80, 220509(R) (2009). [Google Scholar]
  • [32].Tanatar MA, Nagai S, Mao ZQ, Maeno Y, and Ishiguro T, Phys. Rev. B 63, 064505 (2001). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [33].Joynt R and Taillefer L, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 235 (2002). [Google Scholar]
  • [34].Bae S, Kim H, Ran S, Eo YS, Liu I-L, Fuhrman W, Paglione J, Butch NP, and Anlage S, arXiv:1909.09032. [Google Scholar]
  • [35].Hein MA, High-Temperature Superconductor Thin Films at Microwave Frequencies (Springer, Heidelberg, 1999), pp. 45 and 46. [Google Scholar]
  • [36].Dressel M and Gruner G, Electrodynamics of Solids (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 2002). [Google Scholar]
  • [37].Hirschfeld PJ and Goldenfeld N, Phys. Rev. B 48, 4219 (1993). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [38].Einzel D, Hirschfeld PJ, Gross F, Chandrasekhar BS, Andres K, Ott HR, Beuers J, Fisk Z, and Smith JL, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 2513 (1986). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • [39].Gross F, Chandrasekhar BS, Einzel D, Andres K. Hirschfeld PJ, Ott HR, Beuers J, Fisk Z, and Smith JL, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 64, 175 (1986). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES