Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 36 references

Overdoping YBa2Cu3O7 via a heterostructure with La0.67Sr0.33MnO3

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 This paper claims that growing YBCO on a metallic manganite underlayer transfers holes into the YBCO film, producing an overdoped cuprate without adding oxygen or changing the crystal structure.

desk verdict A careful XPS study whose central claim outruns the probe depth: the measured surface spectra of a 500 nm YBCO cap cannot see the buried LSMO/YBCO interface, so the 'overdoped YBCO via interfacial hole transfer' conclusion is unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.15800 v1 pith:N66XY5VG submitted 2025-01-27 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.str-el

Ankita Singh , Sawani Datta , Ram Prakash Pandeya , Srinivas C. Kandukuri , Mahesh Gokhale , Kalobaran Maiti This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.str-el
keywords YBCOLSMOoverdopedcuprateheterostructurechargetransferx-rayphotoemissionCu2pcorelevelhigh-temperaturesuperconductivity
topics High-Temperature Superconductivity
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 tries to establish that a bilayer of La0.67Sr0.33MnO3 (LSMO) and YBa2Cu3O7 (YBCO) pushes the YBCO layer into an overdoped state by transferring holes across the interface. The evidence comes from x-ray photoemission: the O 1s, Ba 4d, and Y 3d core levels all shift about 0.6 eV toward the Fermi level, the valence-band intensity at the Fermi level grows, and a Cu 2p lineshape analysis indicates more holes on the copper sites. This matters because fully oxygenated YBCO is already slightly overdoped and cannot be doped further by adding oxygen, since the Cu-O chains are full; an interface route would open a new way to reach the overdoped regime and study the exotic physics there. The paper also notes that superconductivity survives in the bilayer with a slightly reduced $T_c$, which it calls puzzling.

What carries the argument

The central object is the YBCO/LSMO interface as a site of hole transfer, read through core-level and valence-band photoemission. The quantitative workhorse is a cluster model of the CuO$_4$ plaquette in which the energy gap between the main Cu 2p line and its satellite is $\Delta E = \sqrt{(\Delta - U_{dc} + 2t_{pp})^2 + 4t^2}$ and the satellite-to-main intensity ratio is $I_r = \tan^2(\theta-\phi)$, with $\Delta$ the charge-transfer energy, $U_{dc}$ the Cu 2p-3d Coulomb interaction, and $t$ the Cu-O hopping. Fitting the Cu 2p spectra to this model shows $I_r$ rising from 0.38 in YBCO to 0.47 in the bilayer, which the paper takes as quantitative evidence that more holes sit on the Cu sites.

What would settle it

Perform a depth-resolved photoemission or a thickness series of YBCO on fixed LSMO (e.g., 10 nm, 50 nm, 500 nm): if the 0.6 eV core-level shift and Fermi-level enhancement do not grow or scale with proximity to the LSMO interface, the overdoping is not interfacial. Alternatively, controlled removal of surface layers before XPS would show whether the shifted spectra originate at the interface rather than at the free surface.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that the LSMO/YBCO heterostructure is "a unique case of overdoped YBCO keeping Cu-O chains and Cu-O planes intact." The core-level spectra of the bilayer shift uniformly by about 0.6 eV toward the Fermi level relative to bare YBCO, the spectral weight at the Fermi level is significantly enhanced, and a fit of the Cu 2p spectra with a cluster model gives a larger satellite-to-main intensity ratio and a larger density of delocalized ligand holes, which the authors interpret as an increase in the Cu 3d hole content of the Cu-O planes. That increase in hole concentration, without any change in oxygen content or lattice structure, is the overdoping claim. The paper also reports that the bilayer remains superconducting with $T_c \approx 86$ K, about 3 K lower than the bare YBCO film.

Load-bearing premise

The X-ray photoemission signal comes from the top few nanometres of a 500 nm YBCO film, while the claimed hole transfer happens at the buried interface 500 nm deeper; the paper assumes the surface electronic structure reflects that interfacial process.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim is right, overdoped YBCO can be made without changing oxygen stoichiometry or breaking the Cu-O chains, bypassing the usual doping bottleneck.
  • The drop in $T_c$ from 89 K in YBCO to 86 K in the bilayer is consistent with the YBCO layer moving further past optimal doping, as expected for added holes.
  • The same interface-charge-transfer mechanism could be used to tune doping in other cuprates that cannot be overdoped by oxygenation alone.
  • The simultaneous presence of superconductivity and ferromagnetism in the bilayer suggests the interface hosts competing orders, a regime the paper presents as newly accessible.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An unstated testable consequence is that the amount of transferred charge should depend on the LSMO thickness or its surface termination; a thickness series would separate interfacial charge transfer from substrate strain effects.
  • Because the 500 nm YBCO top layer is far thicker than the XPS probe depth, the paper's surface spectra may reflect the free-surface electronic structure rather than the interface; depth-resolved or cross-section measurements would directly test the attribution.
  • A similar bilayer with a metallic but non-magnetic underlayer could show whether the magnetic ordering of LSMO is essential or incidental to the hole transfer.
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 reports x-ray photoemission spectroscopy (XPS) measurements on high-quality, single-crystalline YBCO films grown on STO and on LSMO-buffered STO, with the YBCO layer approximately 500 nm thick in both cases. The authors observe a roughly 0.6 eV rigid shift of O 1s, Ba 4d, and Y 3d core levels toward the Fermi level in the LSMO/YBCO sample, enhanced valence-band intensity at the Fermi level, and modified Cu 2p lineshapes. They interpret these observations as a Fermi-level shift caused by hole transfer across the buried YBCO/LSMO interface, and conclude that the heterostructure realizes an overdoped YBCO state while keeping the Cu-O chains and planes intact. The paper also cites a previously reported reduction of Tc from 89 K to 86 K in the bilayer as supporting evidence. Structural quality is documented by pole figures, reciprocal-space maps, and XRD, and the authors acknowledge that the temperature dependence of the O 1s spectra is puzzling and requires further study.

Significance. If established, the claim would be significant: it would offer a route to overdoped YBCO without changing oxygen stoichiometry and would open a new doping axis for studying cuprate superconductivity. The paper has clear strengths: the films are structurally characterized, the XPS data are presented at several temperatures and emission angles, the core-level shifts are raw observations rather than fit outputs, and the authors are candid about unexplained spectral evolution. However, the central claim is not supported by the present data. The XPS measurements probe the top few nanometers of a free YBCO surface, while the alleged hole transfer occurs at an interface buried roughly 500 nm below that surface; the comparison is between two separately grown film surfaces for which surface termination and oxygen content may differ. No bulk-sensitive or interface-sensitive measurement connects the surface spectra to interfacial charge transfer. The quantitative Cu 2p analysis also depends on assumed model parameters and multi-peak fits. The central result therefore remains unestablished by the evidence presented.

major comments (4)
  1. [Growth and experimental methods; Figs. 2-5] The YBCO layer is about 500 nm thick in both samples, and the Al Kα XPS measurements with 25-45 degree emission angles probe only the top few nanometers of the film surface. The measured O 1s, Ba 4d, Y 3d, valence-band, and Cu 2p spectra therefore sample the free YBCO surface, not the YBCO/LSMO interface located roughly 500 nm below. The angular dependence changes the surface-to-bulk weight within the near-surface region but does not reach the interface. The paper provides no depth-resolved or interface-sensitive measurement (for example, a YBCO thickness series, hard X-ray photoemission, cross-sectional EELS, or resonant standing-wave experiment) and no bulk-sensitive doping probe (Hall coefficient, c-axis lattice parameter, or oxygen stoichiometry) that ties the surface observations to hole transfer at the buried interface. Without such a bridge, the central claim that the bilayer is overdoped via interfacial charge transfer is not established.
  2. [Y 3d and Cu 2p analysis; Figs. 3 and 5] The comparison is between two separately grown film surfaces, and the authors themselves show that surface chemistry differs between them: the 152.5 eV Y 3d feature is attributed to excess surface oxygen and disappears at 120 K, and the narrow 932.5 eV Cu 2p feature at 300 K is attributed to Cu3+ contributions from excess surface oxygen. Differences in surface termination, oxygen overlayer, surface strain, or surface band bending between YBCO/STO and STO/LSMO/YBCO could produce rigid core-level shifts and enhanced near-Fermi-level intensity without any bulk or interface charge transfer. The attribution of the uniform 0.6 eV shift to a Fermi-level shift therefore requires control measurements that exclude these chemical and electrostatic alternatives; the paper does not provide them.
  3. [Cu 2p fits and model; Eqs. (1)-(3) and Fig. 5(c)-(d)] The quantitative inference that LSMO/YBCO has a larger density of nonlocal ligand holes and a larger 3d9 weight rests on the integrated areas of the fitted A-E peaks and on assumed model parameters tpp = 0.5 eV, t = 1.5 eV, and Udc = 6-8 eV. The paper reports no uncertainties in the fit areas, no variation over the allowed parameter range, and no sensitivity analysis for background subtraction and peak assignment. The reported changes are modest (A/B ratio 0.475 vs 0.55; Ir 0.38 vs 0.47), so the doping conclusion from the Cu 2p analysis is model-dependent even though the raw lineshape differences may be real.
  4. [Summary and use of Tc from Ref. [11]] The reduction of Tc from 89 K to 86 K, quoted from a prior publication, is used as supporting evidence for overdoping. However, proximity to a ferromagnetic LSMO layer, interface disorder, interfacial strain, and changes at the YBCO surface can all suppress Tc in YBCO/LSMO heterostructures without producing bulk overdoping. This observation therefore does not discriminate between hole transfer and other proximity effects, and it cannot compensate for the absence of a direct hole-concentration measurement in the YBCO layer.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract contains 'plains' where 'planes' is intended, and the Introduction uses 'it's heterostructure' where 'its heterostructure' is intended. These should be corrected.
  2. [Experimental section] The energy-scale calibration and the way in which binding energies are referenced to the Fermi level are not described; this matters because a common rigid shift of all core levels can also arise from sample charging or surface band bending.
  3. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption states 'The line in (a) represents LSMO/YBCO NE data' but does not identify the line style in the figure; the figure should be self-contained for the reader.
  4. [Conclusions] The paper acknowledges that the temperature evolution of the O 1s spectra is puzzling, yet the central Cu 2p fits are performed on 35 K data. The unexplained temperature dependence should be resolved or at least explicitly stated as a caveat before the 35 K fits are used as the basis for quantitative doping claims.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the overdoping claim is an interpretation of measured XPS observables and prior empirical characterization, not a derivation from fitted parameters or a self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that the LSMO/YBCO bilayer is overdoped YBCO via interfacial hole transfer—is supported by raw observations (0.6 eV core-level shifts, enhanced Fermi-level intensity, and a changed Cu 2p satellite/main ratio) rather than by an output that was first fitted and then relabeled as a prediction. The model parameters entering the Cu 2p analysis (tpp=0.5 eV, t=1.5 eV, Udc=6–8 eV) are stated assumptions used to interpret the measured ratio, and the inferred Δ≈3–5 eV is a model-dependent characterization, not a circular reuse of the conclusion. Self-citations (notably Ref. [11]) supply prior growth, HRTEM, magnetization/Tc data, and standard spectroscopic assignments; these are empirical and externally checkable, so they are not load-bearing circular support. The sentence 'Such overdoped condition explains the enhancement of intensity at the Fermi level' is a consistency statement, and because the overdoping inference also rests on the core-level shifts and Cu 2p ratio, it is not an equation-level reduction of the argument to its own input. The paper's real weakness is an evidentiary gap—the XPS probe depth is nanometric while the claimed charge transfer is at an interface roughly 500 nm below the surface—but that is a correctness and interpretation risk, not a circularity, and does not raise the circularity score. The paper's own stated puzzles (temperature evolution of the O 1s feature, coexistence of superconductivity and magnetism) are acknowledged limitations rather than hidden circular inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on interpreting core-level shifts as a Fermi-level shift, on the assumption that surface XPS can report interface charge transfer through a 500 nm layer, and on cluster-model fits with assumed parameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • O 1s peak parameters A, B, C = Not reported; simulated spectra shown in Fig. 2(b)
    Peak fitting is used to separate apical oxygen (A), plane/chain oxygen (B), and surface oxygen (C) contributions; no error bars or uncertainties are given.
  • Ba 4d surface and bulk spin-orbit doublet parameters = Surface 4d5/2 at 88.6 eV, bulk at 86.4 eV for YBCO; LSMO/YBCO shifted by about 0.6 eV
    Fitted to decompose surface versus bulk components; used to infer bulk electronic structure renormalization.
  • Y 3d three spin-orbit doublet parameters = Y 3d5/2 at 155.0, 155.7, 156.6 eV for YBCO
    Fits with fixed degeneracy ratio; peak at 156.6 eV assigned to trivalent surface yttrium.
  • Cu 2p main and satellite peak intensities A-E = Integrated areas for YBCO 1.05, 2.21, 0.40, 0.40, 0.42 and for LSMO/YBCO 1.10, 2.00, 0.42, 0.48, 0.56
    Used to compute Ir and infer ligand-hole density and 3d9 weight; no error bars or propagation.
  • Model parameters tpp, t, Udc = tpp = 0.5 eV, t = 1.5 eV, Udc ~ 6-8 eV; Δ = 3-5 eV
    Chosen or assumed values in the Anderson-lattice cluster model to locate YBCO in the charge-transfer regime; Δ is inferred from these assumptions.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Core-level binding-energy shifts between the two films are attributed to a Fermi-level shift rather than to chemical shifts, band bending, or sample-to-sample stoichiometry differences.
    The 0.6 eV shift in Ba 4d, Y 3d, and O 1s is interpreted as a shift of εF; alternative explanations are not excluded because the two samples are separately grown films.
  • domain assumption XPS with Al Kα and 25-45 degree emission samples the YBCO electronic structure relevant to the YBCO/LSMO interface 500 nm below the surface.
    Film thickness is about 500 nm, far exceeding the photoelectron escape depth; no depth profile or interface-sensitive measurement is presented.
  • domain assumption Enhanced intensity at εF in the valence band indicates hole doping of the CuO2 planes.
    The text states 'εF is pinned at the top of the valence band' and equates intensity increase with large hole transfer; this assumes no contribution from the LSMO layer or surface states.
  • domain assumption YBCO with x=7.0 is slightly overdoped, and any additional hole content constitutes overdoping.
    Used to frame the result; the phase-diagram location of fully oxygenated YBCO is still debated.
  • domain assumption The photoemission final-state screening model for Cu 2p (equations for ΔE and Ir) is valid for this system.
    The model connects fitted peak intensities to ligand-hole content; its validity for YBCO films with surface oxygen is assumed without independent verification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Overdoping YBa2Cu3O7 via a heterostructure with La0.67Sr0.33MnO3." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N66XY5VG

@misc{pith2026250115800,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Overdoping YBa2Cu3O7 via a heterostructure with La0.67Sr0.33MnO3},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N66XY5VG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.15800}
}
read the original abstract

YBa2Cu3Ox, the first superconductor discovered with Tc higher than 77 K, is among the most complex cuprates having both CuO chains and plains in the structure. YBa2Cu3O7 (YBCO) exhibits slightly overdoped behavior and further doping is difficult as all the lattice sites in the CuO chains are occupied. We have grown high quality single crystalline films of YBCO and bilayer La0.67Sr0.33MnO3 (LSMO)/YBCO exhibiting superconductivity in both the cases. Photoemission spectra reveal different surface and bulk electronic structures; the difference reduces in the bilayer. Evidence of charge transfer across the bilayer interface is observed in the valence band and core level spectra indicating an overdoped condition in YBCO. While superconductivity in the presence of magnetic order in the bilayer is puzzling, this pathway to reach overdoped regime in YBCO opens up a new landscape to probe the exotic physics of unconventional superconductivity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.15800 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (color online) (a) Crystal structure of YBa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) O 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (color online) Valence band spectra of (a) YBCO and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Ba 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) exhibit weaker intensity around 932 eV in the AE case which supports this view. Spectral lineshape in LSMO/YBCO are almost the same at all the tempera￾tures studied and exhibit reduced intensity around 932 eV relative to YBCO data [see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/ful…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. K. Wu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 908 (1987)

    work page 1987

  2. [2]

    Cava et al., Nature 329, 423 (1987)

    R.J. Cava et al., Nature 329, 423 (1987)

    work page 1987

  3. [3]

    P. K. Gallagher, H. M. O’Bryan, S. A. Sunshine, and D. W. Murphy, Mat. Res. Bull. 22, 995 (1987)

    work page 1987

  4. [4]

    J. D. Jorgensen et al., Phys. Rev. B 41, 1863 (1990); D. E. Fowler, C. R. Brundle, J. Lerczak and F. Holtzberg, J. Electron Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 52, 323 (1990)

    work page 1990

  5. [5]

    Calandra, F

    C. Calandra, F. Manghi and T. Minerva, Phys. Rev. B 46, 3600 (1992); M. Lindroos et al., Physica C 212, 347 (1993)

    work page 1992

  6. [6]

    M. J. Zhang et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 193506 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Chaudhuri, Y.-S

    S. Chaudhuri, Y.-S. Chen, and J. G. Lin,, ACS omega 8, 16694 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    J. J. Wisser and Y. Suzuki, AIP Advances 11, 015007 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    C. Z. Chen et al., J. Appl. Phys. 106, 093902 (2009)

    2009

  2. [10]

    Kurita et al., Phys

    N. Kurita et al., Phys. Rev. B 83, 214513 (2011); G. Adhikary et al., AIP Conf. Proc. 1347, 169 (2011); K. Maiti, Pramana - J. Phys. 84, 947 (2015); G. Adhikary et al., J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 25, 225701 (2013)

    2011

  3. [11]

    Singh et al., SciPost Phys

    A. Singh et al., SciPost Phys. Proc. 11, 007 (2023); A. Singh et al., Nanoscale 16, 9819 (2024)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Houzet and A

    M. Houzet and A. I. Buzdin, Phys. Rev. B 74, 214507 (2006)

    2006

  5. [13]

    Samal and P

    D. Samal and P. S. Anil Kumar, J. Appl. Phys. 109, 07E129 (2011)

    2011

  6. [14]

    R. S. Keizer et al., Nature 439, 825 (2006); H. Bhatt et al., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 14, 8565 (2022)

    2006

  7. [15]

    Przyslupski et al., Phys

    P. Przyslupski et al., Phys. Rev. B, 69, 134428 (2004); P. Przyslupski et al., Supercond. Sci. Technol., 19, 538 (2006)

    2004

  8. [16]

    Hemberger et al., Phys

    J. Hemberger et al., Phys. Rev. B 66, 094410 (2002); R. Bindu et al., New J. Phys. 12, 033026 (2010); R. Bindu, G. Adhikary, and K. Maiti, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 273 012140 (2011); R. Bindu et al., Phys. Rev. B 84, 052407 (2011)

    2002

  9. [17]

    J. D. Jorgensen et al., Phys. Rev. B 41, 1863 (1990)

    1990

  10. [18]

    Arpaia et al., Phys

    R. Arpaia et al., Phys. Rev Mater 2, 024804 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    Maiti, D

    K. Maiti, D. D. Sarma, T. Mizokawa, and A. Fujimori, EPL 37, 359 (1997); K. Maiti, D. D. Sarma, T. Mi- zokawa, and A. Fujimori, Phys. Rev. B 57, 1572 (1998); K. Maiti and D. D. Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 65, 174517 (2002)

    1997

  12. [20]

    Cu 2 contributions appear essentially around 3 eV binding energies

    show that the intensities near εF are dominated by Cu1 contributions. Cu 2 contributions appear essentially around 3 eV binding energies. Such descriptions are con- sistent with the valence band spectra of one-dimensional cuprates which are charge-transfer insulators and has n...

    2019

  13. [21]

    M. P. Seah and W. A. Dench, Surf. Interface Anal. 1, 2 (1979); K. Maiti, P. Mahadevan, and D. D. Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2885 (1998); K. Maiti et al., Phys. Rev. B 73, 052508 (2006); A. Pramanik et al., Phys. Rev. B 101, 035426 (2020); S. Datta et al., Phys. Rev. B 105, 20...

    1979

  14. [22]

    Thiess et al., Phys

    S. Thiess et al., Phys. Rev. B 92, 075117 (2015)

    2015

  15. [23]

    Maiti et al., Phys

    K. Maiti et al., Phys. Rev. B 80, 165132 (2009)

    2009

  16. [24]

    Nakagawa, H

    N. Nakagawa, H. Y. Hwang, and D. A. Muller, Nat. Mater. 5, 204 (2006); S. Mukherjee et al., Phys. Rev. B 93, 245124 (2016)

    2006

  17. [25]

    Krakauer, W

    H. Krakauer, W. E. Pickett, and R. E. Cohen, J. Su- percond. 1, 111 (1988); J. Zaanen, M. Alouani, and O. Jepsen, Phys. Rev. B 40, 837 (1989); W. E. Pickett, Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 433 (1989)

    1988

  18. [26]

    Ba 4 d data exhibit 3 distinct peaks in both the cases

    as typically divalent Ba and trivalent Y have negli- gible contributions at εF . Ba 4 d data exhibit 3 distinct peaks in both the cases. The lower binding energy peak intensity is significantly smaller in the angled emission (AE) data attributing it to the bulk electronic stru...

  19. [27]

    N¨ ucker et al., Phys

    N. N¨ ucker et al., Phys. Rev. B51, 8529 (1995)

    1995

  20. [28]

    R. S. Singh and K. Maiti, Phys. Rev. B 76, 085102 (2007)

    2007

  21. [29]

    Karslioˇ glu, L

    O. Karslioˇ glu, L. Trotochaud, I. Zegkinoglou, and H. Bluhm, J. Elec. Spec. Relat. Phenom. 225, 55 (2018)

    2018

  22. [30]

    C. R. Brundle, and D. E. Fowler, Surf. Sci. Rep. 19, 143 (1993)

    1993

  23. [31]

    Barreca et al., Surf

    D. Barreca et al., Surf. Sci. Spectra 8, 234 (2001)

    2001

  24. [32]

    B¨ oskeet al., Phys

    T. B¨ oskeet al., Phys. Rev. B 57, 138 (1998)

    1998

  25. [33]

    F. C. Zhang and T. M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 37, 3759(R) (1988); M. Taguchi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 177002 (2005); R. P. Pandeya et al., Phys. Rev. B 104, 094508 (2021)

    1988

  26. [34]

    Steiner et al., Z

    P. Steiner et al., Z. Phys. B - Cond. Matter 67, 497 (1987)

    1987

  27. [35]

    D. D. Sarma and S. G. Ovchinnikov, Phys. Rev. B 42, 6817(R) (1990)

    1990

  28. [36]

    Zaanen, G.A

    J. Zaanen, G.A. Sawatzky, and J.W. Allen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 418 (1985); D.D. Sarma et al., Pramana - J. Phys. 38, L531 (1992)

    1985

Pith tools

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