Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 93 references

Anisotropic electron damping and energy gap in Bi$_2$Sr$_2$CaCu$_2$O$_{8+\delta}$

T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read To explain RIXS data in cuprate superconductors, momentum-dependent anisotropic electron scattering (k-DAES) must be included in the charge susceptibility; without it, the extracted energy gap is wrong.

desk verdict Solid RIXS observation and a useful modelling warning, but the central 'only k-DAES works' claim needs a robustness check against finite residual SC damping. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21687 v1 pith:TNTCEKNC submitted 2025-05-27 cond-mat.str-el

Jiemin Li , Yanhong Gu , Takemi Yamada , Zebin Wu , Genda Gu , Tonica Valla , Ilya Drozdov , Ivan Bozovic
show 4 more authors
Mark P. M. Dean Takami Tohyama Jonathan Pelliciari Valentina Bisogni
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords resonantinelasticx-rayscatteringcupratesuperconductorsBi2Sr2CaCu2O8+deltachargesusceptibilitymomentum-dependentanisotropicelectronsuperconductinggapmarginalFermiliquidlow-energyexcitations
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

This paper argues that momentum-resolved measurements of low-energy charge excitations in the cuprate superconductor Bi2212 cannot be interpreted with a momentum-independent electron scattering rate. RIXS spectra taken above and below the superconducting transition show a spectral-weight suppression below about 80 meV whose dip position moves to higher energy with momentum, and no compensating enhancement at higher energies. A charge susceptibility model that includes the momentum-dependent anisotropic electron scattering (k-DAES) measured by ARPES reproduces this behavior, while the same model without it predicts a spurious hump. The authors conclude that k-DAES must be included whenever quantitative parameters such as the superconducting gap are extracted from RIXS data, and that RIXS can serve as a complementary probe of electron dynamics in reciprocal space.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the phenomenological momentum- and energy-dependent scattering rate Gamma_SC_{Q,k}(omega) in Eq. (1). Its energy factor follows an omega-linear marginal-Fermi-liquid form above 2Delta and an $omega^{2}$ suppression below, while its momentum factor adds eight Gaussians centered at the four antinodal points (width $\sigma$ = 0.45pi, amplitude A = 6) to represent the stronger damping near the antinodes. Inserted into the tight-binding charge susceptibility chi_c(Q, omega), this rate suppresses the collective 'hump' that a momentum-independent rate produces just above the gap and turns the superconducting-minus-normal difference into the observed dip; the same parameters are simultaneously constrained by ARPES scattering rates.

What would settle it

Compute Im chi_c(Q, omega) with an alternative momentum-dependent scattering anisotropy (for example a different functional form fitted to the same ARPES data, or a microscopic spin-fluctuation-derived rate) and compare the superconducting-minus-normal difference against the measured RIXS dip at Q = (0.04, 0.04); if a momentum-independent rate plus a different gap symmetry or phonon background also reproduces the dip, the k-DAES necessity claim fails. Alternatively, measure RIXS along the anti-nodal direction, where the two scenarios differ more strongly, and check whether the dip-only signature persists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the central claim is that the Q-dependence of RIXS-measured low-energy charge excitations in the superconducting state of optimally doped Bi2212 is controlled by the momentum-dependent anisotropic electron scattering (k-DAES) previously established by photoemission. In the normal state the spectra show a continuum of charge excitations down to zero energy; in the superconducting state the weight is suppressed below about 80 meV, producing a dip-like superconducting-minus-normal difference whose position moves from roughly 30 meV at Q = (0.02, 0.02) to roughly 50 meV at Q = (0.06, 0.06), with no hump at higher energy. Calculations of Im chi_c(Q, omega) with the scattering rate of Eq. (1) - eight Gaussians at the antinodal points on top of a marginal-Fermi-liquid energy dependence - reproduce the dip and its momentum shift, whereas the same calculation with a momentum-independent rate produces a dip-peak shape that is not observed. Consequently, attempts to quantify the energy gap $\Delta$ from RIXS data without k-DAES will mis-estimate it; with k-DAES the data constrain $\Delta$ to be about 40 meV or less, consistent with the known roughly 30 meV gap. The claim extends beyond the gap: k-DAES affects the charge response up to a few eV, so models of plasmons and other charge excitations in cuprates should include it.

Load-bearing premise

The eight-Gaussian functional form of the momentum-dependent scattering rate, with parameters fixed by ARPES, faithfully represents the true anisotropic electron scattering in the superconducting state below about 100 meV; if the real anisotropy is different, the conclusion that k-DAES is necessary could be a model artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • RIXS measurements near the zone center can be used to extract the size of the superconducting gap, complementing ARPES and STM, and can be applied to buried layers, heterostructures, and other samples inaccessible to surface-sensitive probes.
  • Models of charge excitations in cuprates - acoustic and optical plasmons, temperature dependence of the charge response - must include k-DAES up to the few-eV scale, not just near the gap.
  • The absence of spectral-weight enhancement above the gap in cuprate RIXS is not evidence against gap formation; it is a signature of momentum-dependent damping.
  • Quantitative gap values extracted from previous RIXS analyses that omitted k-DAES may need revision, since those analyses relied on a dip-peak shape that the anisotropic model shows to be spurious.
  • The methodology extends to other layered superconductors, such as infinite-layer nickelates and twisted cuprates, where RIXS is one of the few bulk-sensitive momentum-resolved probes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If k-DAES is as dominant as claimed, finite-momentum probes such as electron energy-loss spectroscopy should show the same dip-only superconducting-minus-normal difference, whereas Raman scattering at Q approximately 0 should remain relatively insensitive to the anisotropy; this contrast could be checked directly.
  • The eight-Gaussian ansatz is an effective parametrization; a microscopic origin (for example spin-fluctuation scattering or pseudogap anisotropy) would predict specific doping and temperature dependence of the amplitude A and width sigma that could be tested across the cuprate phase diagram.
  • The claim that the dip position tracks the gap could be tested by measuring a cuprate with a known different gap magnitude, such as an underdoped compound with a pseudogap, and comparing the predicted versus measured dip shift.
  • The strong near-zone-center suppression of the quasi-elastic peak in the superconducting state could serve as a fast, high-resolution diagnostic of gap opening in other layered superconductors, including those studied under pressure or in heterostructures.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports Cu L3-edge RIXS measurements on optimally doped Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ at three momenta along the nodal direction, in the superconducting (40 K) and normal (250 K) states. The data show a spectral suppression below about 80 meV in the SC state and a dip-like 40K-250K difference spectrum whose minimum moves from about 30 to 50 meV with increasing Q. The authors model the RIXS response with a tight-binding charge susceptibility and introduce a phenomenological scattering rate (Eq. 1) that can be switched between a momentum-independent form (A=0) and a k-dependent anisotropic form (k-DAES) consisting of eight Gaussians at the antinodal points. They show that the k-dependent version produces a dip-only SC-N difference, while the non-k-dependent version produces an additional dip-peak/hump feature, and they argue that the experimental absence of the hump selects the k-DAES model. With this model they constrain the superconducting gap to Δ≲40 meV and conclude that k-DAES must be included when extracting quantitative parameters from RIXS data.

Significance. The paper has several strengths: it presents new high-resolution RIXS data at three Q points, it makes an explicit and falsifiable model comparison between two scattering scenarios, it anchors the anisotropy parameters to published ARPES scattering rates, and it gives a specific proposal for extracting the superconducting gap from RIXS difference spectra. If the central claim holds, it means that momentum-dependent anisotropic electron damping must be included in any RIXS-based analysis of low-energy charge excitations in cuprates, and that previous estimates of gap sizes from RIXS could be biased. The main weakness is that the discriminator between the two models relies on the vanishing of the SC scattering rate at zero energy; this assumption is not tested against a realistic residual damping.

major comments (2)
  1. [Eq. (1), Fig. 3(c), SM Sec. II] Eq. (1) sets Γ_SC(Q,k,ω) to zero at ω=0 for every k because of the prefactor ω^n H(2Δ-ω)+ωH(ω-2Δ). The non-k-dependent scenario (A=0) therefore has a perfectly coherent response at zero energy, which is what produces the sharp coherence peak and the hump in the SC-N difference spectra in Fig. 3(c). The normal-state calculation in the Supplement (Eq. S2 and the text after it) includes a constant δ=0.002 eV in Γ_N, but no analogous constant is included in Γ_SC. Real underdoped and optimally doped cuprates have finite quasiparticle scattering at zero energy from elastic/impurity scattering, so the contrast between the two scenarios may be artificially sharp. If a constant Γ0 of a few meV were added to the non-k-dependent Γ_SC, the coherence peak would broaden and the dip-peak feature could collapse to a dip-only shape, eliminating the main experimental evidence against the non-k-dependent model. The authors should repeat the calculations of Figs. 3(c) and 4 with Γ_SC replaced by Γ_SC + Γ0 for Γ0 values such as 1, 2, and 5 meV, for both A=0 and A≠0, and show that the dip-only discriminator survives. Without this test the abstract's statement that 'only the charge susceptibility with k-DAES captures the RIXS data' is not yet established.
  2. [Eq. (1) and SM Sec. IV] The central claim is presented as a general necessity of k-DAES, but the calculation implements the anisotropy with a specific ad hoc functional form: eight Gaussians centered at the antinodal points, with width σ and amplitude A. The manuscript varies A and σ for this fixed form, but it does not test whether the qualitative difference between the two scenarios is robust to the chosen functional shape of the k-dependence. If a smoother anisotropy, a different placement of the hot spots, or a momentum-dependent elastic term were used, the non-k-dependent benchmark could behave differently. The authors should test at least one alternative parametrization of the anisotropy (for example, a d-wave-like cos(2θ) or a simple antinodal hotspot function) and show that the dip-only versus dip-peak distinction persists. Without such a test, the conclusion that k-DAES is essential, rather than merely that this particular Gaussian model is essential, is overstated.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Introduction, paragraph 2] The word 'uncapable' should be 'incapable'.
  2. [SM Sec. I] 'scoth-tape' should be 'Scotch tape'.
  3. [SM Fig. S2 caption] 'paragmanon' should be 'paramagnon'.
  4. [Reference [48]] The author name 'T. P. evereaux' should be 'T. P. Devereaux'.
  5. [SM Sec. II] The calculation uses T=1.2 K for the SC state and T=120 K for the normal state, while the experimental data are at 40 K and 250 K; the authors should justify this choice or comment on its effect on the Fermi functions and the Bose factor entering S_c(Q,ω).
  6. [Near Fig. 3 caption] The statement that all calculated SC-N curves have weak spectral weight up to ~200 meV that is not captured in the data is a clear limitation; it would be helpful to quantify the mismatch or to test whether an additional broad background component could affect the extracted dip positions.
  7. [Abstract and Conclusions] The claim that 'only' the k-DAES model captures the data is stronger than what can be concluded from three Q points and qualitative comparison; the abstract and conclusions should temper this to 'the present model including k-DAES captures the data, whereas the non-k-dependent model does not' unless the robustness tests are added.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the SC-N dip used to set the k-DAES strength A is then cited as evidence that k-DAES is necessary; ARPES anchoring and the Q-evolution give the claim independent content.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Supplemental Material, Sec. IV ('Determination of the scattering rate in SC state'); main text Sec. III, Fig. 3]
    "With such a σ value, we refine next the A parameter by referring to our RIXS data. ... When increasing the A value to 4 or higher, the hump structure in the SC spectrum gets suppressed, yielding a simple dip feature in the SC-N spectral difference, similar to the RIXS experimental data ... Therefore, for A≥4, we achieve a qualitative good agreement between the calculated and measured RIXS spectral differences."

    The central discriminator for k-DAES necessity is the absence of a hump/dip-peak in the SC-N difference (Fig. 1(f), Fig. 3(c)). That same absence was the optimization target for A: A≥4 was selected because it 'yields a simple dip feature ... similar to the RIXS experimental data,' and A=6 was then fixed for the main-text simulations. The later statement that the k-dependent scenario 'captures our main observations: (1) there is no trace of the hump structure' is therefore, at the fitting point Q=(0.02,0.02), a re-description of the fit target rather than an independent test. The ARPES constraint (A≥4.5 for σ=0.45π) supplies partial independent grounding, and the dip positions at Q=(0.04,0.04) and (0.06,0.06) are genuine forward comparisons, so the circularity is partial.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Main text, paragraph after Fig. 4 ('Our analysis demonstrates...')]
    "Comparing the calculated SC-N spectra to our data, a good agreement can be reached when ∆ ≲ 40 meV, because a dip-peak like shape comes out for larger ∆ values (see the hump feature indicated by a blue triangle in Fig. 4), contrary to the experimental observations that present only a dip."

    The stated extraction of the energy gap, Δ≲40 meV, is evaluated using A=6 and σ=0.45π, parameters that were themselves refined against the same RIXS SC-N dip (Supplemental Sec. IV). The criterion used for this bound—presence or absence of the hump/dip-peak feature—is the same criterion used to set A≥4. Consequently, the quantitative 'gap extraction' is conditioned on the fitted k-DAES ansatz rather than being a parameter-free RIXS measurement; a different assumed scattering anisotropy (or a constant residual SC-state damping) could shift the bound, although the two larger-Q data points provide some independent constraint.

full rationale

The derivation is largely self-contained: the charge susceptibility is a standard tight-binding form, the d-wave gap enters through Δ_k, and the k-dependent scattering anisotropy is anchored in published ARPES measurements, including co-authored but external data. No uniqueness theorem or self-citation chain is invoked, and the model comparison between A=0 and A=6 is a real two-scenario calculation. The circular element is confined to the RIXS-based selection of the anisotropy amplitude A: the dip-only SC-N shape presented as the key evidence for k-DAES is the same feature used to set A≥4 and then A=6, so at the fitting Q the agreement is partly built in. The Δ≤40 meV bound inherits this fitted condition. However, the ARPES data already force A≥4.5 for σ=0.45π, which independently places the model in the no-hump regime, and the Q-evolution from (0.02,0.02) to (0.06,0.06) is not obviously controlled by A. Thus the central claim retains independent content, but the abstract's wording 'only ... k-DAES captures the RIXS data' and 'essential when quantitative parameters ... are extracted' overstates the independence of what is partly a fit re-description. The absence of a residual constant in Γ_SC is a robustness concern rather than a circularity, so it does not raise the score further.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a phenomenological model with several fitted parameters, most notably A, sigma, and Delta. The form of the scattering rate is an assumption tailored to match ARPES and the RIXS data being explained. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • A (anisotropic scattering amplitude) = 6
    Fit to ARPES scattering rates and to reproduce the RIXS SC-N dip shape (Fig. S3e, S4).
  • sigma (Gaussian width in k-space) = 0.45*pi
    Chosen to match ARPES nodal and antinodal scattering rates (Fig. S3d,e).
  • Delta (superconducting gap) = ~30 meV, constrained < 40 meV
    Used as d-wave gap in the model; scan in Fig. 4 shows good agreement only for Delta < 40 meV, consistent with known values.
  • n (power-law exponent below 2Delta) = 2
    Hand-chosen; authors note n=3 does not change conclusions.
  • C1, C2, C3 (phonon and paramagnon amplitudes) = not given
    Adjusted to match the simulated charge response and the data (Sec. III of SM).
  • Paramagnon energy slope and width = 1000 meV per r.l.u., width 320 meV
    Fixed based on prior literature to fit the broad spectral weight.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption RIXS cross-section is proportional to the charge dynamic structure factor Sc(Q,omega) = Im chi_c/(1 - exp(-omega/kT))
    Used throughout to relate the measured spectra to the calculated susceptibility (Refs. 25, 27, 30; SM Sec. II).
  • domain assumption Tight-binding band structure of Bi2212 from Ref. 11 and d-wave gap describe the relevant electronic states
    Basis for the chi_c calculation (SM Eq. S1, S2).
  • domain assumption Normal state scattering rate follows marginal Fermi liquid form Gamma_N = delta + omega with delta = 0.002 eV
    Used for the normal state calculation (SM Sec. II).
  • ad hoc to paper Eight Gaussian curves at the antinodal points capture the anisotropic k-dependence of the SC scattering rate
    Phenomenological form introduced in Eq. (1), fitted to ARPES and RIXS data; not derived from a microscopic theory.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Anisotropic electron damping and energy gap in Bi$_2$Sr$_2$CaCu$_2$O$_{8+\delta}$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TNTCEKNC

@misc{pith2026250521687,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Anisotropic electron damping and energy gap in Bi$_2$Sr$_2$CaCu$_2$O$_8+\delta$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TNTCEKNC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21687}
}
abstract

The many body electron-electron interaction in cuprates causes the broadening of the electronic bands in \textit{\textbf{k}}-space, leading to a deviation from the standard Fermi liquid. While a \textit{\textbf{k}}-dependent anisotropic electronic scattering (\textit{\textbf{k}}-DAES) has been assessed by photoemission, its fingerprint in \textit{\textbf{Q}}-space has been scarcely considered. Here, we explore the \textit{\textbf{Q}}-dependent electron dynamics in optimally doped Bi$_2$Sr$_2$CaCu$_2$O$_{8+\delta}$ through the evolution of low-energy charge excitations as measured by resonant inelastic x ray scattering (RIXS). In the normal state, the RIXS spectra display a continuum of excitations down to 0~meV, while the superconducting state features a spectral weight suppression below 80 meV without any enhancement at higher energies. To interpret the energy and \textit{\textbf{Q}}-evolution of our data, we introduce a phenomenological expression of the charge susceptibility by including the \textit{\textbf{k}}-DAES. We show that only the charge susceptibility with \textit{\textbf{k}}-DAES captures the RIXS data, highlighting the importance of \textit{\textbf{k}}-DAES when describing the \textit{\textbf{Q}}-dependence of charge excitations from 0 to few eV scale. Furthermore, we also find that the inclusion of \textit{\textbf{k}}-DAES is essential when quantitative parameters such as the electronic energy gap are extracted from RIXS data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21687 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Sketch of particle-hole excitations across the energy gap in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) reports the RIXS spectra at Q=(0.02, 0.02) in the SC (blue open dots) and normal (red open dots) states. In the low energy region, we can identify mul￾tiple excitations, previously discussed in RIXS studies of Bi-based cuprates [41–45]. The peaks at ∼ 80 meV and ∼ 125 meV correspond, respectively, to the apical phonon (labelled as Phonon1) and a combined phonon mode (labelled as Phonon2) between the apical and t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Momentum dependence of RIXS spectra in the normal and SC states, and the corresponding simulations along the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. RIXS spectra at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bardeen, L

    J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Theory of superconductivity, Phys. Rev. 108, 1175 (1957)

    1957

  2. [2]

    J. G. Bednorz and K. A. M¨ uller, Possible highTc super- conductivity in the Ba-La-Cu-O system, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik B Condensed Matter 64, 189 (1986)

    1986

  3. [3]

    Nagamatsu, N

    J. Nagamatsu, N. Nakagawa, T. Muranaka, Y. Zenitani, and J. Akimitsu, Superconductivity at 39k in magnesium diboride, Nature 410, 63 (2001)

    2001

  4. [4]

    Keimer, S

    B. Keimer, S. A. Kivelson, M. R. Norman, S. Uchida, and J. Zaanen, From quantum matter to high-temperature su- perconductivity in copper oxides, Nature518, 179 (2015)

    2015

  5. [5]

    G. A. Thomas, J. Orenstein, D. H. Rapkine, M. Capizzi, A. J. Millis, R. N. Bhatt, L. F. Schneemeyer, and J. V. Waszczak, Ba 2YCu3O7−δ: Electrodynamics of Crystals with High Reflectivity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1313 (1988)

    1988

  6. [6]

    R. T. Collins, Z. Schlesinger, F. Holtzberg, P. Chaud- hari, and C. Feild, Reflectivity and conductivity of YBa2Cu3O7, Phys. Rev. B 39, 6571 (1989)

    1989

  7. [7]

    Boˇ zovi´ c, J

    I. Boˇ zovi´ c, J. H. Kim, J. S. Harris, and W. Y. Lee, Optical study of plasmons in Tl 2Ba2Ca2Cu3O10, Phys. Rev. B 43, 1169 (1991)

    1991

  8. [8]

    S. L. Cooper, A. L. Kotz, M. A. Karlow, M. V. Klein, W. C. Lee, J. Giapintzakis, and D. M. Ginsberg, Devel- opment of the optical conductivity with doping in single- domain YBa2Cu3O6+x, Phys. Rev. B 45, 2549 (1992)

    1992

Show all 93 references
  1. [9]

    Abrahams and C

    E. Abrahams and C. M. Varma, What angle-resolved pho- toemission experiments tell about the microscopic theory for high-temperature superconductors, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97, 5714 (2000)

    2000

  2. [10]

    D. A. Bonn, P. Dosanjh, R. Liang, and W. N. Hardy, Evidence for rapid suppression of quasiparticle scattering below Tc in YBa 2Cu3O7−δ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 2390 (1992)

    1992

  3. [11]

    C. T. Rieck, W. A. Little, J. Ruvalds, and A. Virosztek, Infrared and microwave spectra of an energy gap in high- temperature superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 51, 3772 (1995)

    1995

  4. [12]

    C. M. Varma, P. B. Littlewood, S. Schmitt-Rink, E. Abra- hams, and A. E. Ruckenstein, Phenomenology of the normal state of Cu-O high-temperature superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 1996 (1989)

    1989

  5. [13]

    Abdel-Jawad, M

    M. Abdel-Jawad, M. P. Kennett, L. Balicas, A. Car- rington, A. P. Mackenzie, R. H. McKenzie, and N. E. Hussey, Anisotropic scattering and anomalous normal- state transport in a high-temperature superconductor, Nature Physics 2, 821 (2006)

    2006

  6. [14]

    Y. Fang, G. Grissonnanche, A. Legros, S. Verret, F. Lal- ibert´ e, C. Collignon, A. Ataei, M. Dion, J. Zhou, D. Graf, M. J. Lawler, P. A. Goddard, L. Taillefer, and B. J. Ramshaw, Fermi surface transformation at the pseudo- gap critical point of a cuprate superconductor, Natur...

    2022

  7. [15]

    Valla, A

    T. Valla, A. V. Fedorov, P. D. Johnson, B. O. Wells, S. L. Hulbert, Q. Li, G. D. Gu, and N. Koshizuka, Evidence for Quantum Critical Behavior in the Optimally Doped Cuprate Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ, Science 285, 2110 (1999)

    1999

  8. [16]

    Valla, A

    T. Valla, A. V. Fedorov, P. D. Johnson, Q. Li, G. D. Gu, and N. Koshizuka, Temperature Dependent Scat- tering Rates at the Fermi Surface of Optimally Doped Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 828 (2000)

    2000

  9. [17]

    Kaminski, H

    A. Kaminski, H. M. Fretwell, M. R. Norman, M. Ran- deria, S. Rosenkranz, U. Chatterjee, J. C. Cam- puzano, J. Mesot, T. Sato, T. Takahashi, T. Terashima, M. Takano, K. Kadowaki, Z. Z. Li, and H. Raffy, Mo- mentum anisotropy of the scattering rate in cuprate su- perconductors, ...

    2005

  10. [18]

    Chang, M

    J. Chang, M. Mansson, S. Pailhes, T. Claesson, O. J. Lipscombe, S. M. Hayden, L. Patthey, O. Tjernberg, and J. Mesot, Anisotropic breakdown of Fermi liquid quasi- particle excitations in overdoped La 2−xSrxCuO4, Nature Communications 4, 2559 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    C. M. Varma and E. Abrahams, Effective Lorentz Force due to Small-Angle Impurity Scattering: Magnetotrans- port in High- Tc Superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4652 (2001)

    2001

  12. [20]

    M. R. Norman, Anisotropic exchange and superconduc- tivity in UPt 3, Phys. Rev. B 41, 170 (1990)

    1990

  13. [21]

    A. J. Millis, Nearly antiferromagnetic fermi liquids: An analytic eliashberg approach, Phys. Rev. B 45, 13047 (1992)

    1992

  14. [22]

    T. Dahm, P. J. Hirschfeld, D. J. Scalapino, and L. Zhu, Nodal quasiparticle lifetimes in cuprate superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 72, 214512 (2005)

    2005

  15. [23]

    Mitrano, A

    M. Mitrano, A. A. Husain, S. Vig, A. Kogar, M. S. Rak, S. I. Rubeck, J. Schmalian, B. Uchoa, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, G. D. Gu, and P. Abbamonte, Anomalous den- sity fluctuations in a strange metal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 5392 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    A. A. Husain, M. Mitrano, M. S. Rak, S. Rubeck, B. Uchoa, K. March, C. Dwyer, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, G. D. Gu, and P. Abbamonte, Crossover of charge fluc- tuations across the strange metal phase diagram, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041062 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    L. J. P. Ament, M. van Veenendaal, T. P. Devereaux, J. P. Hill, and J. van den Brink, Resonant inelastic x-ray scattering studies of elementary excitations, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 705 (2011)

    2011

  18. [26]

    Mitrano, S

    M. Mitrano, S. Johnston, Y.-J. Kim, and M. P. M. Dean, Exploring quantum materials with resonant inelastic x- ray scattering, Phys. Rev. X 14, 040501 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Marra, S

    P. Marra, S. Sykora, K. Wohlfeld, and J. van den Brink, Resonant inelastic x-ray scattering as a probe of the phase and excitations of the order parameter of superconduc- tors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 117005 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    Suzuki, M

    H. Suzuki, M. Minola, Y. Lu, Y. Peng, R. Fuma- galli, E. Lefran¸ cois, T. Loew, J. Porras, K. Kummer, D. Betto, S. Ishida, H. Eisaki, C. Hu, X. Zhou, M. W. Haverkort, N. B. Brookes, L. Braicovich, G. Ghiringhelli, M. Le Tacon, and B. Keimer, Probing the energy gap of high-temp...

    2018

  21. [29]

    Merzoni, L

    G. Merzoni, L. Martinelli, L. Braicovich, N. B. Brookes, F. Lombardi, F. Rosa, R. Arpaia, M. Moretti Sala, and G. Ghiringhelli, Charge response function probed by res- onant inelastic x-ray scattering: Signature of electronic gaps of YBa2Cu3O7−δ, Phys. Rev. B 109, 184506 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    C. Jia, K. Wohlfeld, Y. Wang, B. Moritz, and T. P. Dev- ereaux, Using rixs to uncover elementary charge and spin excitations, Phys. Rev. X 6, 021020 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    See Supplementary Material for details at

  24. [32]

    M. R. Norman, M. Randeria, H. Ding, and J. C. Cam- puzano, Phenomenological models for the gap anisotropy of Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8 as measured by angle-resolved photoe- mission spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. B 52, 615 (1995)

    1995

  25. [33]

    W. S. Lee, I. M. Vishik, K. Tanaka, D. H. Lu, 7 T. Sasagawa, N. Nagaosa, T. P. Devereaux, Z. Hussain, and Z.-X. Shen, Abrupt onset of a second energy gap at the superconducting transition of underdoped Bi2212, Nature 450, 81 (2007)

    2007

  26. [34]

    Kondo, R

    T. Kondo, R. Khasanov, T. Takeuchi, J. Schmalian, and A. Kaminski, Competition between the pseudogap and superconductivity in the high-tc copper oxides, Nature 457, 296 (2009)

    2009

  27. [35]

    Valla, I

    T. Valla, I. K. Drozdov, and G. D. Gu, Disappearance of superconductivity due to vanishing coupling in the over- doped Bi 2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ, Nature Communications 11, 569 (2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    I. M. Vishik, E. A. Nowadnick, W. S. Lee, Z. X. Shen, B. Moritz, T. P. Devereaux, K. Tanaka, T. Sasagawa, and T. Fujii, A momentum-dependent perspective on quasi- particle interference in Bi 2Sr2CaCu2O8, Nature Physics 5, 718 (2009)

    2009

  29. [37]

    I. M. Vishik, M. Hashimoto, R.-H. He, W.-S. Lee, F. Schmitt, D. Lu, R. G. Moore, C. Zhang, W. Meevasana, T. Sasagawa, S. Uchida, K. Fujita, S. Ishida, M. Ishikado, Y. Yoshida, H. Eisaki, Z. Hussain, T. P. Devereaux, and Z.-X. Shen, Phase competition in trisected superconductin...

    2012

  30. [38]

    Onari, H

    S. Onari, H. Kontani, and M. Sato, Structure of neutron- scattering peaks in both s++-wave ands±-wave states of an iron pnictide superconductor, Phys. Rev. B81, 060504 (2010)

    2010

  31. [39]

    Hashimoto, I

    M. Hashimoto, I. M. Vishik, R.-H. He, T. P. Dev- ereaux, and Z.-X. Shen, Energy gaps in high-transition- temperature cuprate superconductors, Nature Physics 10, 483 (2014)

    2014

  32. [40]

    Dvorak, I

    J. Dvorak, I. Jarrige, V. Bisogni, S. Coburn, and W. Leon- hardt, Towards 10 meV resolution: The design of an ul- trahigh resolution soft X-ray RIXS spectrometer, Review of Scientific Instruments 87, 115109 (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    M. P. M. Dean, A. J. A. James, R. S. Springell, X. Liu, C. Monney, K. J. Zhou, R. M. Konik, J. S. Wen, Z. J. Xu, G. D. Gu, V. N. Strocov, T. Schmitt, and J. P. Hill, High- Energy Magnetic Excitations in the Cuprate Supercon- ductor Bi 2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ: Towards a Unified Descrip- ...

    2013

  34. [42]

    M. P. M. Dean, A. J. A. James, A. C. Walters, V. Bisogni, I. Jarrige, M. H¨ ucker, E. Giannini, M. Fujita, J. Pelliciari, Y. B. Huang, R. M. Konik, T. Schmitt, and J. P. Hill, Itinerant effects and enhanced magnetic interactions in bi-based multilayer cuprates, Phys. Rev. B 90...

    2014

  35. [43]

    Dean, Insights into the high temperature supercon- ducting cuprates from resonant inelastic x-ray scatter- ing, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 376, 3 (2015)

    M. Dean, Insights into the high temperature supercon- ducting cuprates from resonant inelastic x-ray scatter- ing, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 376, 3 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    Chaix, G

    L. Chaix, G. Ghiringhelli, Y. Y. Peng, M. Hashimoto, B. Moritz, K. Kummer, N. B. Brookes, Y. He, S. Chen, S. Ishida, Y. Yoshida, H. Eisaki, M. Salluzzo, L. Braicovich, Z.-X. Shen, T. P. Devereaux, and W.- S. Lee, Dispersive charge density wave excitations in Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ: T...

    2017

  37. [45]

    J. Li, A. Nag, J. Pelliciari, H. Robarts, A. Walters, M. Garcia-Fernandez, H. Eisaki, D. Song, H. Ding, S. Johnston, R. Comin, and K.-J. Zhou, Multiorbital charge-density wave excitations and concomitant phonon anomalies in Bi 2Sr2LaCuO6+δ, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academ...

    2020

  38. [46]

    T. P. Devereaux, A. M. Shvaika, K. Wu, K. Wohlfeld, C. J. Jia, Y. Wang, B. Moritz, L. Chaix, W.-S. Lee, Z.-X. Shen, G. Ghiringhelli, and L. Braicovich, Directly charac- terizing the relative strength and momentum dependence of electron-phonon coupling using resonant inelastic ...

    2016

  39. [47]

    H. C. Robarts, M. Barth´ elemy, K. Kummer, M. Garc´ ıa- Fern´ andez, J. Li, A. Nag, A. C. Walters, K. J. Zhou, and S. M. Hayden, Anisotropic damping and wave vec- tor dependent susceptibility of the spin fluctuations in La2−xSrxCuO4 studied by resonant inelastic x-ray scat- te...

    2019

  40. [48]

    Hepting, L

    M. Hepting, L. Chaix, E. W. Huang, R. Fumagalli, Y. Y. Peng, B. Moritz, K. Kummer, N. B. Brookes, W. C. Lee, M. Hashimoto, T. Sarkar, J.-F. He, C. R. Rotundu, Y. S. Lee, R. L. Greene, L. Braicovich, G. Ghiringhelli, Z. X. Shen, T. P. evereaux, and W. S. Lee, Three-dimensional ...

    2018

  41. [49]

    A. Nag, M. Zhu, M. Bejas, J. Li, H. C. Robarts, H. Ya- mase, A. N. Petsch, D. Song, H. Eisaki, A. C. Walters, M. Garc´ ıa-Fern´ andez, A. Greco, S. M. Hayden, and K.- J. Zhou, Detection of acoustic plasmons in hole-doped lanthanum and bismuth cuprate superconductors using reso...

    2020

  42. [50]

    A. Nag, L. Zinni, J. Choi, J. Li, S. Tu, A. C. Walters, S. Agrestini, S. M. Hayden, M. Bejas, Z. Lin, H. Yamase, K. Jin, M. Garc´ ıa-Fern´ andez, J. Fink, A. Greco, and K.- J. Zhou, Impact of electron correlations on two-particle charge response in electron- and hole-doped cup...

    2024

  43. [51]

    Scott, E

    K. Scott, E. Kisiel, T. J. Boyle, R. Basak, G. Jargot, S. Das, S. Agrestini, M. Garcia-Fernandez, J. Choi, J. Pel- liciari, J. Li, Y.-D. Chuang, R. Zhong, J. A. Schneeloch, G. Gu, F. L´ egar´ e, A. F. Kemper, K.-J. Zhou, V. Bisogni, S. Blanco-Canosa, A. Frano, F. Boschini, and...

    2023

  44. [52]

    Greco, H

    A. Greco, H. Yamase, and M. Bejas, Plasmon excitations in layered high- Tc cuprates, Phys. Rev. B 94, 075139 (2016)

    2016

  45. [53]

    Greco, H

    A. Greco, H. Yamase, and M. Bejas, Origin of high-energy charge excitations observed by resonant inelastic X-ray scattering in cuprate superconductors, Communications Physics 2, 3 (2019)

    2019

  46. [54]

    Y. Zhu, M. Liao, Q. Zhang, H.-Y. Xie, F. Meng, Y. Liu, Z. Bai, S. Ji, J. Zhang, K. Jiang, R. Zhong, J. Schneeloch, G. Gu, L. Gu, X. Ma, D. Zhang, and Q.-K. Xue, Pres- ence of s-Wave Pairing in Josephson Junctions Made of Twisted Ultrathin Bi 2Sr2CaCu2O8+x Flakes, Phys. Rev. X ...

    2021

  47. [55]

    O. Can, T. Tummuru, R. P. Day, I. Elfimov, A. Damas- celli, and M. Franz, High-temperature topological super- conductivity in twisted double-layer copper oxides, Na- ture 17, 519 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    L. Ju, T. Ren, Z. Li, Z. Liu, C. Shi, Y. Liu, S. Hong, J. Wu, H. Tian, Y. Zhou, and Y. Xie, Emergence of high-temperature superconductivity at the interface of two Mott insulators, Phys. Rev. B 105, 024516 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    S. Y. F. Zhao, X. Cui, P. A. Volkov, H. Yoo, S. Lee, J. A. Gardener, A. J. Akey, R. Engelke, Y. Ronen, R. Zhong, G. Gu, S. Plugge, T. Tummuru, M. Kim, M. Franz, J. H. Pixley, N. Poccia, and P. Kim, Time-reversal symmetry 8 breaking superconductivity between twisted cuprate su-...

    2023

  50. [58]

    D. Li, K. Lee, B. Y. Wang, M. Osada, S. Crossley, H. R. Lee, Y. Cui, Y. Hikita, and H. Y. Hwang, Supercon- ductivity in an infinite-layer nickelate, Nature 572, 624 (2019)

    2019

  51. [59]

    H. Lu, M. Rossi, A. Nag, M. Osada, D. F. Li, K. Lee, B. Y. Wang, M. Garcia-Fernandez, S. Agrestini, Z. X. Shen, E. M. Been, B. Moritz, T. P. Devereaux, J. Zaanen, H. Y. Hwang, K.-J. Zhou, and W. S. Lee, Magnetic excitations in infinite-layer nickelates, Science 373, 213 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Hepting, M

    M. Hepting, M. P. M. Dean, and W.-S. Lee, Soft X- Ray Spectroscopy of Low-Valence Nickelates, Frontiers in Physics 9, 10.3389/fphy.2021.808683 (2021)

    2021

  53. [61]

    Anisotropic electron damping and energy gap in Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ

    S. Fan, H. LaBollita, Q. Gao, N. Khan, Y. Gu, T. Kim, J. Li, V. Bhartiya, Y. Li, W. Sun, J. Yang, S. Yan, A. Barbour, X. Zhou, A. Cano, F. Bernardini, Y. Nie, Z. Zhu, V. Bisogni, C. Mazzoli, A. S. Botana, and J. Pel- liciari, Capping Effects on Spin and Charge Excitations in P...

    2024

  54. [63]

    Hashimoto, I

    M. Hashimoto, I. M. Vishik, R.-H. He, T. P. Devereaux, and Z.-X. Shen, Nature Physics 10, 483 (2014)

    2014

  55. [64]

    J. Wen, Z. Xu, G. Xu, M. H¨ ucker, J. Tranquada, and G. Gu, Journal of Crystal Growth 310, 1401 (2008)

    2008

  56. [65]

    I. K. Drozdov, I. Pletikosi´ c, C.-K. Kim, K. Fujita, G. D. Gu, J. C. S. Davis, P. D. Johnson, I. Boˇ zovi´ c, and T. alla, Nature Communications 9, 5210 (2018)

    2018

  57. [66]

    Valla, I

    T. Valla, I. K. Drozdov, and G. D. Gu, Nature Commu- nications 11, 569 (2020)

    2020

  58. [67]

    Dvorak, I

    J. Dvorak, I. Jarrige, V. Bisogni, S. Coburn, and W. Leonhardt, Review of Scientific Instruments 87, 115109 (2016)

    2016

  59. [68]

    Minola, G

    M. Minola, G. Dellea, H. Gretarsson, Y. Y. Peng, Y. Lu, J. Porras, T. Loew, F. Yakhou, N. B. Brookes, Y. B. Huang, J. Pelliciari, T. Schmitt, G. Ghiringhelli, B. Keimer, L. Braicovich, and M. Le Tacon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 217003 (2015)

    2015

  60. [69]

    Chaix, G

    L. Chaix, G. Ghiringhelli, Y. Y. Peng, M. Hashimoto, B. Moritz, K. Kummer, N. B. Brookes, Y. He, S. Chen, S. Ishida, Y. Yoshida, H. Eisaki, M. Salluzzo, L. Braicovich, Z.-X. Shen, T. P. Devereaux, and W.-S. Lee, Nature Physics 13, 952 (2017)

    2017

  61. [70]

    L. J. P. Ament, M. van Veenendaal, T. P. Devereaux, J. P. Hill, and J. van den Brink, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 705 (2011)

    2011

  62. [71]

    Marra, S

    P. Marra, S. Sykora, K. Wohlfeld, and J. van den Brink, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 117005 (2013)

    2013

  63. [72]

    C. Jia, K. Wohlfeld, Y. Wang, B. Moritz, and T. P. Devereaux, Phys. Rev. X 6, 021020 (2016)

    2016

  64. [73]

    M. R. Norman, M. Randeria, H. Ding, and J. C. Cam- puzano, Phys. Rev. B 52, 615 (1995)

    1995

  65. [74]

    J. A. Sobota, Y. He, and Z.-X. Shen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025006 (2021)

    2021

  66. [75]

    Schlesinger, R

    Z. Schlesinger, R. T. Collins, F. Holtzberg, C. Feild, S. H. Blanton, U. Welp, G. W. Crabtree, Y. Fang, and J. Z. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 801 (1990)

    1990

  67. [76]

    P. V. Bogdanov, A. Lanzara, X. J. Zhou, W. L. Yang, H. Eisaki, Z. Hussain, and Z. X. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 167002 (2002)

    2002

  68. [77]

    Valla, A

    T. Valla, A. V. Fedorov, P. D. Johnson, B. O. Wells, S. L. 6 Hulbert, Q. Li, G. D. Gu, and N. Koshizuka, Science285, 2110 (1999)

    1999

  69. [78]

    Valla, A

    T. Valla, A. V. Fedorov, P. D. Johnson, Q. Li, G. D. Gu, and N. Koshizuka, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 828 (2000)

    2000

  70. [79]

    Abdel-Jawad, M

    M. Abdel-Jawad, M. P. Kennett, L. Balicas, A. Carring- ton, A. P. Mackenzie, R. H. McKenzie, and N. E. Hussey, Nature Physics 2, 821 (2006)

    2006

  71. [80]

    Kaminski, H

    A. Kaminski, H. M. Fretwell, M. R. Norman, M. Ran- deria, S. Rosenkranz, U. Chatterjee, J. C. Cam- puzano, J. Mesot, T. Sato, T. Takahashi, T. Terashima, M. Takano, K. Kadowaki, Z. Z. Li, and H. Raffy, Phys. Rev. B 71, 014517 (2005)

    2005

  72. [81]

    Chang, M

    J. Chang, M. Mansson, S. Pailhes, T. Claesson, O. J. Lipscombe, S. M. Hayden, L. Patthey, O. Tjernberg, and J. Mesot, Nature Communications 4, 2559 (2013)

    2013

  73. [82]

    Suzuki, M

    H. Suzuki, M. Minola, Y. Lu, Y. Peng, R. Fuma- galli, E. Lefran¸ cois, T. Loew, J. Porras, K. Kummer, D. Betto, S. Ishida, H. Eisaki, C. Hu, X. Zhou, M. W. Haverkort, N. B. Brookes, L. Braicovich, G. Ghiringhelli, M. Le Tacon, and B. Keimer, npj Quantum Materials 3, 65 (2018)

    2018

  74. [83]

    M. P. M. Dean, A. J. A. James, R. S. Springell, X. Liu, C. Monney, K. J. Zhou, R. M. Konik, J. S. Wen, Z. J. Xu, G. D. Gu, V. N. Strocov, T. Schmitt, and J. P. Hill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 147001 (2013)

    2013

  75. [84]

    T. P. Devereaux, A. M. Shvaika, K. Wu, K. Wohlfeld, C. J. Jia, Y. Wang, B. Moritz, L. Chaix, W.-S. Lee, Z.-X. Shen, G. Ghiringhelli, and L. Braicovich, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041019 (2016)

    2016

  76. [85]

    H. C. Robarts, M. Barth´ elemy, K. Kummer, M. Garc´ ıa- Fern´ andez, J. Li, A. Nag, A. C. Walters, K. J. Zhou, and S. M. Hayden, Phys. Rev. B 100, 214510 (2019)

    2019

  77. [86]

    J. Li, A. Nag, J. Pelliciari, H. Robarts, A. Walters, M. Garcia-Fernandez, H. Eisaki, D. Song, H. Ding, S. Johnston, R. Comin, and K.-J. Zhou, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, 16219 (2020)

    2020

  78. [87]

    Boˇ zovi´ c, J

    I. Boˇ zovi´ c, J. H. Kim, J. S. Harris, and W. Y. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 43, 1169 (1991)

    1991

  79. [88]

    S. L. Cooper, A. L. Kotz, M. A. Karlow, M. V. Klein, W. C. Lee, J. Giapintzakis, and D. M. Ginsberg, Phys. Rev. B 45, 2549 (1992)

    1992

  80. [89]

    D. A. Bonn, P. Dosanjh, R. Liang, and W. N. Hardy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 2390 (1992)

    1992

  81. [90]

    C. T. Rieck, W. A. Little, J. Ruvalds, and A. Virosztek, Phys. Rev. B 51, 3772 (1995)

    1995

  82. [91]

    Yoshida, M

    T. Yoshida, M. Hashimoto, I. M. Vishik, Z.-X. Shen, and A. Fujimori, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 81, 011006 (2012)

    2012

  83. [92]

    X. He, X. Xu, X. Shi, and I. Boˇ zovi´ c, Condensed Matter 8 (2023), 10.3390/condmat8010013

    2023 doi

  84. [93]

    C. T. Chen, L. H. Tjeng, J. Kwo, H. L. Kao, P. Rudolf, F. Sette, and R. M. Fleming, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 2543 (1992)

    1992

  85. [110]

    Throughout the experiment, the scattering angle was fixed to 150 ◦

    axis lying in the scattering plane. Throughout the experiment, the scattering angle was fixed to 150 ◦. The Miller indices in this study are defined by a pseudote- tragonal unit cell, with a =b = 3.82˚Aand c = 30.7˚A [7]. The momentum transfer Q is defined in reciprocal lat- t...

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.