Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 59 references

Probing Sign-Changing Order Parameters via Impurity States in unconventional superconductors: Implications for La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$ Superconductors with interlayer pairing

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Impurity-induced in-gap states occur exactly when a superconductor's order parameter changes sign along its Fermi surface, and the paper uses this to propose a spectroscopic test for pairing symmetry in La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$.

desk verdict The numerics for interlayer pairing are promising, but the paper's central analytic derivation of the resonance condition has a miscomputed determinant and needs a major fix. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01155 v3 pith:I3NYPQ2W submitted 2025-01-02 cond-mat.supr-con

Junkang Huang , Z. D. Wang , Tao Zhou This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords unconventionalsuperconductivityimpurityboundstatesT-matrixtheorypairingsymmetrynickelatesuperconductorsinterlayerscanningtunnelingmicroscopysign-changingorderparameter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets out to prove a direct link between the sign change of a superconducting order parameter along the Fermi surface and the appearance of bound states around a single nonmagnetic impurity. Working within the $T$-matrix description of impurity scattering, it shows that a sign-changing gap makes the impurity $T$-matrix denominator nearly vanish at zero energy, producing sharp in-gap resonances, while a sign-preserving gap with the same magnitude does not. It then applies the same logic to interlayer $s$-wave pairing in a bilayer: written in bonding and antibonding bands, that pairing is $s_\pm$, so it too produces impurity resonances. For the bilayer nickelate La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$ with interlayer pairing, the predicted signature is two sharp peaks symmetrically placed about the Fermi energy. This gives a concrete spectroscopy-based criterion for distinguishing interlayer pairing from intralayer $d$-wave or $s_\pm$ pairing in the nickelates.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the impurity $T$-matrix denominator $A(\omega)=\det[\hat I-\hat U\hat G_0(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r},\omega)]$: resonant in-gap states occur where its real and imaginary parts vanish at the same low energy. At zero energy it reduces to $A(0)=V_{\rm imp}^2[(\sum_{\bf k}P_{\bf k})^2+(\sum_{\bf k}Q_{\bf k})^2]$ (and to the interlayer counterpart in Eqs. (12)-(15)), so the existence of a bound state is controlled by two weighted Brillouin-zone sums over the Fermi surface. The argument is that $P_{\bf k}$ changes sign across the Fermi surface and largely cancels, while $Q_{\bf k}$ cancels whenever the gap sign reverses under a symmetry of the band structure. That cancellation is the mechanism: sign-changing order parameters suppress the denominator and create the resonances; sign-preserving order parameters leave the denominator finite.

What would settle it

Measure the local density of states next to a deliberately placed impurity in a fully gapped La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$ sample (film or crystal) by scanning tunneling spectroscopy. If the interlayer-pairing scenario is right, a strong scalar impurity should produce two sharp resonant peaks symmetric about the Fermi energy inside the gap; if instead only a single mid-gap resonance appears, or no in-gap resonance is observed, the specific cancellation mechanism proposed here would be ruled out.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the impurity-induced bound state is not a generic property of a particular gap shape but is tied specifically to the order parameter changing sign as one moves along the normal-state Fermi surface. For intralayer pairing, the zero-energy real part of the $T$-matrix denominator is $A(0)=V_{\rm imp}^2[(\sum_{\bf k}P_{\bf k})^2+(\sum_{\bf k}Q_{\bf k})^2]$, with $P_{\bf k}=\varepsilon_{\bf k}/(\varepsilon_{\bf k}^2+\Delta_{\bf k}^2)$ and $Q_{\bf k}=\Delta_{\bf k}/(\varepsilon_{\bf k}^2+\Delta_{\bf k}^2)$. $P_{\bf k}$ cancels between hole and electron regions and $Q_{\bf k}$ cancels under the symmetry that reverses the gap sign, so a sign-changing $d$-wave gap gives $A(0)\simeq0$ and a mid-gap resonance; replacing $\Delta_{\bf k}$ by its absolute value removes the sign change and removes the in-gap feature. Adding an $s$-wave component that shifts the gap nodes off the Fermi surface continuously weakens and then eliminates the resonances at a critical value $\Delta^c_s=\Delta_d(1-|\mu|/4)$. For interlayer $s$-wave pairing, transforming to bonding and antibonding bands makes the gap opposite in sign on the two Fermi pockets, and the analogous cancellation of $Q'_{\bf k}$ yields two resonant peaks symmetric about zero energy; the same two-peak signature survives in a two-orbital model of La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$ with self-consistently determined interlayer pairing.

Load-bearing premise

The argument would collapse if the cancellation that makes $A(0)$ small is spoiled by unequal weights of the two Fermi pockets, by a Fermi surface on which the gap nodes do not cross, or by a non-negligible imaginary part of $A(\omega)$ inside the gap.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For intralayer $d_{x^2-y^2}$ pairing near half-filling, a nonmagnetic impurity produces a sharp mid-gap resonant peak, and the same gap with its sign made positive everywhere produces no in-gap structure.
  • As an $s$-wave component is added to a $d$-wave gap, the mid-gap peak splits and weakens, and it disappears entirely once the $s$-wave component reaches the value at which the gap no longer changes sign along the Fermi surface.
  • In a bilayer with dominant interlayer $s$-wave pairing, the impurity response consists of two sharp resonant peaks positioned symmetrically about the Fermi energy, because the band-basis gap is $s_\pm$.
  • In a two-orbital model of La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$ with self-consistent interlayer pairing, the two symmetric peaks survive, so STM on a single impurity can distinguish interlayer pairing from intralayer $d$-wave (one mid-gap peak) or intralayer $s_\pm$ (weaker in-gap states).

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The zero-denominator condition suggests the probe is not limited to the two cases computed here: any sign-changing gap whose Fermi-surface sums cancel should show impurity resonances, and the $p+ip$ example in the paper's supplemental material is a sign that this is a symmetry-independent rule.
  • A testable extension: the strength and peak position of the two symmetric resonances should depend on the relative weights of the bonding and antibonding Fermi pockets, so doping or pressure that unbalances the pockets is a way to turn the predicted signature off and verify the mechanism.
  • With ambient-pressure thin films now available, one can look for the two-peak signature directly; a null result in a fully gapped film would be evidence against dominant interlayer pairing of the type modeled here.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies single-impurity scattering in unconventional superconductors using the T-matrix formalism. It considers intralayer d-wave pairing on a square lattice and interlayer s-wave pairing in a bilayer model, and it claims to establish an analytical link between the sign change of the superconducting order parameter along the Fermi surface and the appearance of in-gap impurity resonances. The authors extend the analysis to a two-orbital bilayer model of La3Ni2O7 and predict two resonant peaks symmetric about the Fermi energy for interlayer pairing. The numerical part follows standard T-matrix methodology, but the analytical derivation of the central claim, especially Eqs. (8) and (12), contains a determinant identity error that undermines the stated proof.

Significance. If the central claim were established, the paper would provide a practical spectroscopic tool for distinguishing pairing symmetries in bilayer nickelates, and the two-peak prediction for interlayer pairing would be a concrete, falsifiable experimental signature. The numerical implementation is standard, the control case with an absolute-value gap is a useful test, and the realistic two-orbital model with self-consistent pairing is a valuable extension. However, the analytical centerpiece of the paper, Eq. (8) and its interlayer counterpart Eq. (12), is incorrect as written: the unit matrix in Det[I - U G0] is omitted. Because the claimed link between sign reversal and in-gap states is presented as a derived result rather than merely as a numerical observation, the paper's significance currently rests on an invalid derivation. The numerics may still support the qualitative conclusion, but the analytical argument must be corrected before the claim can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III, Eq. (8)] The stated expression for A(0) is not the determinant defined in Eq. (5). For the single-band Nambu problem with U = V τ_z and G0(r,r,0) = -ΣP τ_z - ΣQ τ_x, where P_k = ε_k/(ε_k²+Δ_k²) and Q_k = Δ_k/(ε_k²+Δ_k²), direct evaluation gives Det[I - U G0(0)] = (1+VΣP)² + (VΣQ)². The paper's Eq. (8) omits the (1+VΣP)² term. Consequently, the statement in the text that small ΣP and small ΣQ imply Re A(0) ≈ 0 is incorrect; if ΣP = ΣQ = 0, the exact determinant equals 1. The pole condition is actually 1+VΣP = 0 together with ΣQ = 0, not V²[(ΣP)²+(ΣQ)²] = 0. This invalidates the analytical derivation of the claimed intrinsic link in Section III, including the interpretation of Fig. 1(b) and the conclusion in the abstract that in-gap states are directly linked to the sign reversal of the order parameter.
  2. [Section IV, Eq. (12)] The same unit-matrix omission appears in the interlayer expression. For the 4x4 Nambu problem of the bilayer model, the exact determinant of I - U G0 contains terms of the form (1+...)² that are not captured by V²[(ΣP')²+(ΣQ')²]. Therefore the sentence immediately below Eq. (15) claiming that 'our analytical calculation indicates that in-gap resonant peaks generally exist' is not supported by the derivation. At most, the symmetry arguments show that ΣQ' can be small; they do not show that the full determinant vanishes. The prediction of two symmetric resonant peaks for interlayer pairing in Figs. 4 and 5 is thus supported only by the numerics, and the analytical rationale, as well as the dependence on V, t⊥, and chemical potential, must be re-derived with the correct determinant.
  3. [Section III, Figs. 2 and 3] The crossover at Δ_s = Δ_s^c is interpreted through the concavity of Re A(ω) and the disappearance of sign change along the Fermi surface. Since this interpretation relies on the incorrect Eq. (8), the analytical explanation of why in-gap features disappear at the critical value needs to be redone with the full determinant, including the frequency-dependent terms from G0(ω). The numerical observation of a crossover is not in question, but the claim that it establishes an 'intrinsic relationship' between sign reversal and in-gap states is not established by the presented derivation.
  4. [Section III and Supplemental S-2] The same incorrect form of A(0) is used for the p+ip case in Eq. (S1) of the Supplemental Material. Since the Supplemental explicitly repeats Eq. (8), the correction is not a local issue but affects the global analytical framework of the paper. Any revised version must propagate the corrected determinant through all analytical statements, including those in the Supplemental.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV heading] The section heading reads 'La2Ni3O7' while the rest of the paper, including the title and abstract, refers to La3Ni2O7. Please correct the compound formula.
  2. [Section III, around Eq. (8)] The notation A(ω) is used both for the full determinant and for its real part; Eq. (8) is written as if A(0) equals Re A(0), but the text later discusses Re A(ω) and Im A(ω) separately. Please define Re A(ω) and Im A(ω) explicitly and write the determinant in a way that makes the real and imaginary parts unambiguous.
  3. [Section III, Δ_s^c formula] The critical s-wave component Δ_s^c = Δ_d(1-|μ/4|) is stated without derivation in the main text and attributed to Ref. [55]. Since this quantity plays a central role in the numerical crossover analysis, a short derivation or at least a clear statement of its origin in the main text would improve readability.
  4. [Section II, Eq. (5) and Supplemental S-3] The definition of the impurity potential U in Eq. (5) uses U_{1+N_l,1+N_l} = -Vimp, which is clear for the single-band bilayer model. However, the realistic two-orbital model in Supplemental S-3 sets U11 = U22 and U55 = U66, implying the impurity acts on both orbitals of layer 1. Please state explicitly that this is the intended generalization and clarify whether the main-text notation N_l refers to layers or to orbitals in the two-orbital case.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the impurity-response predictions are computed consequences of a stated tight-binding T-matrix model, and the overlapping-author citations are background or secondary support rather than load-bearing inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Equations (1)-(7) define a concrete Nambu tight-binding model and the standard T-matrix LDOS formalism, and the in-gap resonance condition (Re A near zero with small Im A) is evaluated from A(omega) = Det[I - U G0] using both numerics and model-specific analytic expressions. The claim that sign-changing pairing yields in-gap states is not an input: it is tested against the sign-preserving |Delta_k| control in Figs. 1(c)-(d) and against the s+id crossover at Delta_c^s in Figs. 2-3, both of which are independent computations from the same model. The rewriting of interlayer pairing as s+- pairing in the band basis, Eq. (16), is a direct algebraic identity rather than an imported ansatz. Self-citations, including Refs. [23], [53], and [54], are used for context or secondary agreement; the La3Ni2O7 two-orbital impurity result is a fresh numerical calculation in this work, and the text explicitly leaves the nickelate pairing symmetry open. The paper's own stated limitations (non-interacting model, point impurity) are scope conditions, not circular inputs. For completeness, a non-circular correctness concern exists: Eq. (8) is asserted without derivation and appears to omit the (1+V SigmaP)^2 term from the determinant in Eq. (5), so the printed analytic zero-energy condition is not literally Det[I - U G0(0)]; however, the numerical A(omega) curves in Figs. 1-5 come from the full determinant, making this an algebraic-support issue rather than an equivalence-to-input, and it does not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard T-matrix mean-field framework plus several hand-set parameters and two specific cancellation assumptions. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced. The main fragility is the approximate Fermi-pocket cancellation behind the interlayer prediction, and the unstated neglect of the identity and cross terms in the determinant expansion leading to Eq. (8).

free parameters (7)
  • Delta_0 (intralayer d-wave gap magnitude) = 0.2 (in units of t)
    Chosen for the single-layer d-wave demonstrations in Sec. III; sets the energy scale for the mid-gap resonance.
  • V_imp (impurity potential) = 20 t
    Strong-scattering limit used in the T-matrix pole condition; the analytic A(0) expressions scale with V_imp^2.
  • Gamma (quasiparticle broadening) = 0.01 t
    Small imaginary part in the Green's function, Eq. (4); controls the width of impurity peaks.
  • mu (chemical potential) = 0.2 and 2 t
    Two fillings are used to test the d-wave and critical s-wave scenarios in Sec. III.
  • t_perp (interlayer hopping) = 1.5 t
    Strong interlayer hopping in the simplified bilayer model of Sec. IV; validates the band-basis s+- picture.
  • Delta_perp (interlayer pairing) = 0.2 t
    Interlayer s-wave pairing magnitude in the simplified bilayer model of Sec. IV.
  • V (pairing potential in realistic model) = 0.8
    Used in supplemental S-3 for self-consistent interlayer pairing in the La3Ni2O7 model; determines the resulting Delta_perp.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The clean system is described by a non-interacting mean-field BCS Hamiltonian with static pairing terms (Eqs. 1-3).
    The paper explicitly notes in the outlook that electronic correlations are neglected; this underlies all impurity response calculations.
  • domain assumption The impurity is a single site with scalar potential V_imp (and -V_imp on the hole block), treated via the T-matrix formula Eq. (5).
    This is the standard impurity model from Balatsky et al.; Anderson impurities and finite impurity concentrations are deferred to future work.
  • ad hoc to paper Low-energy impurity features are governed by the real part of A(omega), and Im A(omega) is small inside the gap (Sec. III).
    This is used to reduce the resonance condition to Re A(0) near zero; it is stated but not proven for all parameter regimes.
  • ad hoc to paper For the interlayer model, the two normal-state Fermi pockets approximately cancel in the sum over Q'_k (Eqs. 13-15).
    The claim that the summation of Q'_k is generally small relies on the two pockets having opposite epsilon_k with comparable weight, which is approximate at finite doping.
  • domain assumption The two-orbital bilayer model with tight-binding parameters from Ref. [40] and self-consistent interlayer pairing captures La3Ni2O7 (supplemental S-3).
    The realistic model is taken from a DFT-based tight-binding parametrization; its validity for impurity response is assumed.
  • standard math Standard Green's function and determinant identities used in the T-matrix expansion are correct.
    No formal proof is given in the main text; the determinant in Eq. (8) is stated without a step-by-step derivation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing Sign-Changing Order Parameters via Impurity States in unconventional superconductors: Implications for La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$ Superconductors with interlayer pairing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/I3NYPQ2W

@misc{pith2026250101155,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing Sign-Changing Order Parameters via Impurity States in unconventional superconductors: Implications for La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$ Superconductors with interlayer pairing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/I3NYPQ2W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01155}
}
abstract

Motivated by the desire to investigate the fundamental relationship between impurity-induced states and the sign change of the superconducting order parameter, as well as to explore the impurity effects in Ruddlesden-Popper nickelate superconductors with interlayer pairing, we employ the $T$-matrix approach to study single impurity scattering in unconventional superconductors. Our work focuses on two distinct pairing scenarios: intralayer $d$-wave pairing and interlayer $s$-wave pairing. For systems with intralayer $d$-wave pairing, we establish an intrinsic connection between the $d$-wave pairing symmetry and the emergence of mid-gap resonant states. Through a combination of analytical derivations and numerical simulations, we demonstrate that the appearance of in-gap states is directly linked to the sign reversal of the order parameter along the Fermi surface. In interlayer pairing systems, our results reveal the presence of pronounced resonant peaks, which can also be attributed to the sign-changing nature of the order parameter. We further extend our analysis to the bilayer nickelate superconductor La$_3$Ni$_2$O$_7$, providing a theoretical investigative of impurity effects in this material. Our findings not only elucidate the complex interplay between pairing symmetries and impurity-induced states in unconventional superconductors but also offer a powerful tool for probing the pairing mechanisms in nickelate-based high-temperature superconductors. This work lays the groundwork for future experimental and theoretical investigations into the unique electronic properties of these emerging materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01155 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Solid line: LDOS spectrum at the nearest neigh [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) LDOS spectra at the nearest neighbor site of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) The real part of the function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Solid line: LDOS spectrum at the nearest neigh [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Solid line: LDOS spectrum at the nearest neigh [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. H. Pan, E. W. Hudson, K. M. Lang, H. Eisaki, S. Uchida, and J. C. Davis, Imaging the effects of in- dividual zinc impurity atoms on superconductivity in Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ, Nature 403, 746 (2000)

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    A. V. Balatsky, I. Vekhter, and J.-X. Zhu, Impurity- induced states in conventional and unconventional su- perconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 373 (2006)

    2006

  3. [3]

    L. Zhu, W. A. Atkinson, and P. J. Hirschfeld, Two impu- rities in a d-wave superconductor: Local density of states, Phys. Rev. B 67, 094508 (2003)

    work page 2003

  4. [4]

    Polkovnikov, S

    A. Polkovnikov, S. Sachdev, and M. Vojta, Impurity in a d-wave superconductor: Kondo effect and stm spectra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 296 (2001)

    work page 2001

  5. [5]

    B. M. Andersen, A. Melikyan, T. S. Nunner, and P. J. Hirschfeld, Andreev states near short-ranged pairing po- tential impurities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 097004 (2006)

    work page 2006

  6. [6]

    Moradian, B

    R. Moradian, B. L. Gy¨ orffy, and J. F. Annett, Impu- rity bound states in disordered d-wave superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 287002 (2002)

    work page 2002

  7. [7]

    T. Zhou, H. Huang, Y. Gao, J.-X. Zhu, and C. S. Ting, Quasiparticle states around a nonmagnetic impurity in electron-doped iron-based superconductors with spin- density-wave order, Phys. Rev. B 83, 214502 (2011)

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    Y. Gao, Y. Yu, T. Zhou, H. Huang, and Q.-H. Wang, In-gap bound states induced by a single nonmagnetic impurity in sign-preserving s-wave superconductors with incipient bands, Phys. Rev. B 96, 220507 (2017)

    work page 2017

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Tsai, Y.-Y

    W.-F. Tsai, Y.-Y. Zhang, C. Fang, and J. Hu, Impurity-induced bound states in iron-based supercon- ductors with s-wave cos kx ·cos ky pairing symmetry, Phys. Rev. B 80, 064513 (2009)

    2009

  2. [10]

    T. K. Ng and Y. Avishai, In-gap bound states induced by 8 nonmagnetic impurities in two-band s± superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 80, 104504 (2009)

    2009

  3. [11]

    Zhang, Nonmagnetic impurity resonances as a signa- ture of sign-reversal pairing in feas-based superconduc- tors, Phys

    D. Zhang, Nonmagnetic impurity resonances as a signa- ture of sign-reversal pairing in feas-based superconduc- tors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 186402 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    Y. Gao, Y. Yu, T. Zhou, H. Huang, and Q.-H. Wang, Hidden sign-changing s-wave superconductivity in mono- layer fese, Phys. Rev. B 94, 144512 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    Akbari, I

    A. Akbari, I. Eremin, and P. Thalmeier, Magnetic im- purity resonance states and symmetry of the supercon- ducting order parameter in iron-based superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 81, 014524 (2010)

    2010

  6. [14]

    M. N. Gastiasoro, P. J. Hirschfeld, and B. M. Andersen, Impurity states and cooperative magnetic order in fe- based superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 88, 220509 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    J. H. J. Martiny, A. Kreisel, and B. M. Andersen, The- oretical study of impurity-induced magnetism in fese, Phys. Rev. B 99, 014509 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    Matsumoto, M

    M. Matsumoto, M. Koga, and H. Kusunose, Single impurity effects in multiband supercon- ductors with different sign order parameters, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 78, 084718 (2009)

    2009

  9. [17]

    Bang, H.-Y

    Y. Bang, H.-Y. Choi, and H. Won, Impurity effects on the ± s-wave state of the iron-based superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 79, 054529 (2009)

    2009

  10. [18]

    Huang, Y

    H. Huang, Y. Gao, D. Zhang, and C. S. Ting, Impurity-induced quasiparticle interference in the parent compounds of iron-pnictide superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 84, 134507 (2011)

    2011

  11. [19]

    T. O. Wehling, H. P. Dahal, A. I. Lichtenstein, and A. V. Balatsky, Local impurity effects in superconducting graphene, Phys. Rev. B 78, 035414 (2008)

    2008

  12. [20]

    Li and T

    Y.-Q. Li and T. Zhou, Impurity effect as a probe for the pairing symmetry of graphene-based superconduc- tors, Front. Phys. 16, 43502 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    Liu and T

    J. Liu and T. Zhou, Probing the pairing symmetry in kagome superconductors based on the single-particle spectrum, Phys. Rev. B 109, 054504 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    S. C. Holbæk, M. H. Christensen, A. Kreisel, and B. M. Andersen, Unconventional superconductiv- ity protected from disorder on the kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. B 108, 144508 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Huang, Z

    J. Huang, Z. D. Wang, and T. Zhou, Impurity and vor- tex states in the bilayer high-temperature superconduc- tor La3Ni2O7, Phys. Rev. B 108, 174501 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    T. Zhou, Y. Gao, and Z. D. Wang, Resolv- ing different pairing states in weyl supercon- ductors through the single-particle spectrum, Phys. Rev. B 98, 024515 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    H. Hu, L. Jiang, H. Pu, Y. Chen, and X.-J. Liu, Universal impurity-induced bound state in topological superfluids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 020401 (2013)

    2013

  18. [26]

    Liu, Impurity probe of topological superfluids in one-dimensional spin-orbit-coupled atomic fermi gases, Phys

    X.-J. Liu, Impurity probe of topological superfluids in one-dimensional spin-orbit-coupled atomic fermi gases, Phys. Rev. A 87, 013622 (2013)

    2013

  19. [27]

    J. D. Sau and E. Demler, Bound states at impurities as a probe of topological superconductivity in nanowires, Phys. Rev. B 88, 205402 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    Nagai, Y

    Y. Nagai, Y. Ota, and M. Machida, Nonmag- netic impurity effects in a three-dimensional topolog- ical superconductor: From p- to s-wave behaviors, Phys. Rev. B 89, 214506 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Setty, P

    C. Setty, P. W. Phillips, and A. Narayan, Quasi- particle interference and resonant states in nor- mal and superconducting line nodal semimetals, Phys. Rev. B 95, 140202 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    Wimmer, A

    M. Wimmer, A. R. Akhmerov, M. V. Medvedyeva, J. Tworzyd/suppress lo, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Majo- rana bound states without vortices in topolog- ical superconductors with electrostatic defects, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 046803 (2010)

    2010

  23. [31]

    Zha and Y.-Y

    G.-Q. Zha and Y.-Y. Jin, Impurity-induced bound states in chiral p-wave superconducting nanoloops, Europhysics Letters 120, 27002 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    Y.-W. Guo, W. Li, and Y. Chen, Impurity- and magnetic- field-induced quasiparticle states in chiral p-wave super- conductors, Front. Phys. 12, 127403 (2017)

    2017

  25. [33]

    Csire, B

    G. Csire, B. ´Ujfalussy, J. Cserti, and B. Gy˝ orffy, Multiple scattering theory for superconducting heterostructures, Phys. Rev. B 91, 165142 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    T. G. Saunderson, J. F. Annett, B. ´Ujfalussy, G. Csire, and M. Gradhand, Gap anisotropy in multiband su- perconductors based on multiple scattering theory, Phys. Rev. B 101, 064510 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Ny´ ari, A

    B. Ny´ ari, A. L´ aszl´ offy, L. Szunyogh, G. Csire, K. Park, and B. Ujfalussy, Relativistic first-principles theory of yu-shiba-rusinov states applied to mn adatoms and mn dimers on nb(110), Phys. Rev. B 104, 235426 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    J. A. Sauls and P. Sharma, Impurity effects on the A1− a2 splitting of superfluid 3He in aerogel, Phys. Rev. B 68, 224502 (2003)

    2003

  29. [37]

    Y. Gao, T. Zhou, H. Huang, C. S. Ting, P. Tong, and Q.- H. Wang, Probing active/passive bands by quasiparticle interference in sr 2ruo4, Phys. Rev. B 88, 094514 (2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    Hu, Midgap surface states as a novel signature for d 2 xa-x 2 b -wave superconductivity, Phys

    C.-R. Hu, Midgap surface states as a novel signature for d 2 xa-x 2 b -wave superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1526 (1994)

    1994

  31. [39]

    H. Sun, M. Huo, X. Hu, J. Li, Z. Liu, Y. Han, L. Tang, Z. Mao, P. Yang, B. Wang, J. Cheng, D.-X. Yao, G.- M. Zhang, and M. Wang, Signatures of superconduc- tivity near 80K in a nickelate under high pressure, Nature 621, 493 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Z. Luo, X. Hu, M. Wang, W. W´ u, and D.-X. Yao, Bilayer two-orbital model of La 3Ni2O7 under pressure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 126001 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    E. K. Ko, Y. Yu, Y. Liu, L. Bhatt, J. Li, V. Thampy, C.-T. Kuo, B. Y. Wang, Y. Lee, K. Lee, J.-S. Lee, B. H. Goodge, D. A. Muller, and H. Y. Hwang, Signa- tures of ambient pressure superconductivity in thin film La3Ni2O7, Nature 10.1038/s41586-024-08525-3 (2024)

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    G. Zhou, W. Lv, H. Wang, Z. Nie, Y. Chen, Y. Li, H. Huang, W. Chen, Y. Sun, Q.-K. Xue, and Z. Chen, Ambient-pressure superconductivity on- set above 40 K in bilayer nickelate ultrathin films, arXiv:2412.16622 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    arXiv

  35. [43]

    Wang, H.-H

    M. Wang, H.-H. Wen, T. Wu, D.-X. Yao, and T. Xiang, Normal and superconducting properties of La 3Ni2O7, Chin. Phys. Lett. 41, 077402 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    Y. Gao, Theoretical investigation of the super- conducting pairing symmetry in a bilayer two- orbital model of pressurized La 3Ni2O7, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2412.11429 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    arXiv

  37. [45]

    K.-J. Zhou, X. Chen, J. Choi, Z. Jiang, J. Mei, K. Jiang, J. Li, S. Agrestini, M. Garcia-Fernandez, H. Sun, X. Huang, D. Shen, M. Wang, J. Hu, Y. Lu, and D. Feng, Electronic and magnetic excitations in La 3Ni2O7 (2024). 9

    2024

  38. [46]

    T. Xie, M. Huo, X. Ni, F. Shen, X. Huang, H. Sun, H. C. Walker, D. Adroja, D. Yu, B. Shen, L. He, K. Cao, and M. Wang, Strong interlayer magnetic exchange coupling in La 3Ni2O7−δ revealed by inelastic neutron scattering, Sci. Bull. 69, 3221 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Yang, G.-M

    Y.-f. Yang, G.-M. Zhang, and F.-C. Zhang, Inter- layer valence bonds and two-component theory for high-Tc superconductivity of La 3Ni2O7 under pressure, Phys. Rev. B 108, L201108 (2023)

    2023

  40. [48]

    C. Lu, Z. Pan, F. Yang, and C. Wu, Interplay of two Eg orbitals in superconducting La3Ni2O7 under pressure, Phys. Rev. B 110, 094509 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    Oh and Y.-H

    H. Oh and Y.-H. Zhang, Type-II t − J model and shared superexchange coupling from hund’s rule in supercon- ducting La3Ni2O7, Phys. Rev. B 108, 174511 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    J. Chen, F. Yang, and W. Li, Orbital-selective su- perconductivity in the pressurized bilayer nickelate La3Ni2O7: An infinite projected entangled-pair state study, Phys. Rev. B 110, L041111 (2024)

    2024

  43. [51]

    C. Lu, Z. Pan, F. Yang, and C. Wu, Interlayer-coupling- driven high-temperature superconductivity in La 3Ni2O7 under pressure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 146002 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Xue and F

    J.-R. Xue and F. Wang, Magnetism and super- conductivity in the t − J model of La 3Ni2O7 under multiband gutzwiller approximation, Chin. Phys. Lett. 41, 057403 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    Lu and T

    M. Lu and T. Zhou, Spin excitations in bilayer la3ni2o7 superconductors with interlayer pairing, Phys. Rev. B 111, 094504 (2025)

    2025

  46. [54]

    Huang and T

    J. Huang and T. Zhou, s± pairing via interlayer interac- tion in la2. 85pr0. 15ni2o7 thin films under ambient pressure (2025), arXiv:2503.23861 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    2025 arXiv

  47. [55]

    See supplemental material for probing sign-changing or- der parameters via impurity states in unconventional su- perconductors: Implications for la 3ni2o7 superconduc- tors with interlayer pairing

  48. [56]

    Wang, G.-Q

    X.-Q. Wang, G.-Q. Luo, J.-Y. Liu, W. V. Liu, A. Hemmerich, and Z.-F. Xu, Evidence for an atomic chiral superfluid with topological excitations, Nature 596, 227 (2021)

    2021

  49. [57]

    E. K. Ko, Y. Yu, Y. Liu, L. Bhatt, J. Li, V. Thampy, C.-T. Kuo, B. Y. Wang, Y. Lee, K. Lee, J.-S. Lee, B. H. Goodge, D. A. Muller, and H. Y. Hwang, Signa- tures of ambient pressure superconductivity in thin film La3Ni2O7, Natrue 638, 8052 (2025)

    2025

  50. [58]

    G. Zhou, W. Lv, H. Wang, Z. Nie, Y. Chen, Y. Li, H. Huang, W. Chen, Y. Sun, Q.-K. Xue, and Z. Chen, Ambient-pressure superconductivity on- set above 40 k in (La,Pr)3Ni2O7 films, Nature 10.1038/s41586-025-08755-z (2025)

    2025 doi

  51. [59]

    J. Shen, Y. Miao, Z. Ou, G. Zhou, Y. Chen, R. Luan, H. Sun, Z. Feng, X. Yong, P. Li, Y. Li, L. Xu, W. Lv, Z. Nie, H. Wang, H. Huang, Y.-J. Sun, Q.-K. Xue, Z. Chen, and J. He, Anomalous energy gap in su- perconducting La2. 85Pr0. 15Ni2O7/SrLaAlO4 heterostruc- tures (2025), arXi...

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.