Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 42 references

Quasiparticle interaction originating from Bogoliubov Fermi Surfaces under pressure in 18%-S substituted FeSe studied via NMR

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper uses NMR under pressure to argue that the anomalous upturn in 1/T1T deep in the superconducting state of 18%-S-substituted FeSe, a signature of scattering between Bogoliubov Fermi-surface segments, persists at 2 GPa and is thus…

desk verdict Useful pressure-dependent NMR data, but the load-bearing 'persists at 2 GPa' claim lacks error bars; worth refereeing with a request for uncertainties and raw data. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.20139 v2 pith:DJRMYMZK submitted 2025-07-27 cond-mat.supr-con

Zhongyu Yu , Xiaoling Shen , Koya Nakamura , Kazuya Inomata , Kohei Matsuura , Yuta Mizukami , Shigeru Kasahara , Yuji Matsuda
show 3 more authors
Takasada Shibauchi Yoshiya Uwatoko Naoki Fujiwara
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords 77SeNMRBogoliubovFermisurfacesFeSe1-xSxultranodalsuperconductivityspin-latticerelaxationratepressurespinfluctuationsiron-basedsuperconductors
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 reports 77Se NMR measurements of the iron-based superconductor FeSe0.82S0.18 (18% S substitution) under pressures up to 2.0 GPa and temperatures down to about 100 mK. The authors aim to establish that the anomalous upturn in the spin-lattice relaxation rate 1/T1T deep in the superconducting state—previously seen at ambient pressure and attributed to scattering between segments of Bogoliubov Fermi surfaces (topologically protected nodal surfaces inside the gap)—is suppressed but not eliminated by pressure. Such a result matters because it would confirm that Bogoliubov quasiparticles in this material interact with one another and that the ultranodal superconducting state survives under pressure. The paper also finds that in the normal state the same relaxation signal becomes temperature-independent at 2 GPa while the superconducting-state upturn persists, indicating that Bogoliubov quasiparticles nest differently from normal electrons.

What carries the argument

The quantity that carries the argument is the nuclear spin-lattice relaxation rate divided by temperature, $1/T_1T \propto (1/\omega)\sum_{\mathbf q} \mathrm{Im}\,\chi(\mathbf q)$, which measures low-energy spin fluctuations. The central object is the Bogoliubov Fermi surface (BFS), a topologically protected set of zero-energy nodal surfaces in a superconductor with broken time-reversal symmetry, which keeps a finite density of states inside the superconducting gap. The comparison model is an RPA spin-fluctuation calculation for a two-hole-pocket system with C2-symmetric BFSs at the Γ point, in which scattering between BFS segments at $\mathbf q\simeq(0.4\pi,0)$ under a strong Hubbard interaction $U$ produces the upturn in $1/T_1T$; the paper reads the pressure suppression of the upturn as $U$ becoming weaker but nonzero. In the normal state, a standard Korringa relation, $1/(T_1T)=(4\pi k_B/\hbar)(\gamma_n/\gamma_e)^2 K_{\rm spin}^2 K(\alpha)$, connects the measured rate to the correlation factor $K(\alpha)$, giving $K(\alpha)\simeq 15$ at 2 GPa, which the authors take as evidence that antiferromagnetic fluctuations persist even though the normal-state upturn is gone.

What would settle it

A 77Se-NMR experiment at 2 GPa on samples with controlled electron-irradiation damage, measuring 1/T1T as a function of field and disorder level, would settle the claim: if the residual upturn tracks disorder or field strength, it is not an intrinsic Bogoliubov Fermi-surface interaction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the low-temperature upturn of 1/T1T in the superconducting state of FeSe0.82S0.18, which at ambient pressure was interpreted as enhanced spin fluctuations from scattering between Bogoliubov Fermi-surface segments, is weakened but still visible at 2.0 GPa. The authors conclude that the interaction strength U between Bogoliubov quasiparticles becomes smaller under pressure but remains nonzero. In the normal state, by contrast, 1/T1T flattens to a constant at 2.0 GPa, which they attribute to a pressure-induced Lifshitz transition that changes the dominant nesting wave vector; the persistence of the upturn below Tc shows that Bogoliubov quasiparticles nest differently from normal electrons. These observations are interpreted as consistent with the theoretical model of Bogoliubov Fermi surfaces with C2 symmetry at the Γ point, where the upturn arises from enhanced χ(q) at q≈(0.4π,0) between BFS segments carrying interband spin-triplet particle-hole mixing.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the 1/T1T upturn in the superconducting state is an intrinsic bulk signal from scattering between Bogoliubov Fermi-surface segments, not a vortex-core, impurity, or pressure-cell artifact, and that the spin contribution to the Knight shift stays at 0.03% under pressure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the upturn is truly a BFS scattering signature, then the superconducting state of FeSe0.82S0.18 contains zero-energy Bogoliubov quasiparticles that interact, not simply a nodal gap with noninteracting quasiparticles.
  • The persistence at 2 GPa means BFS behavior is not confined to ambient pressure, so pressure is a tunable knob for the interaction strength in this material.
  • The different temperature dependence of 1/T1T above and below Tc at 2 GPa implies that the relevant nesting wave vector changes from q≈(π,0) for normal electrons to q≈(0.4π,0) for Bogoliubov quasiparticles, a testable spectral prediction.
  • The estimated K(α) ≈ 15 at 2 GPa in the normal state says antiferromagnetic correlations remain fairly strong even where the 1/T1T upturn disappears, so pressure mainly disrupts the nesting that produces the upturn.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: Because the paper estimates K(α) from the normal-state Korringa relation and then uses that picture below Tc, one could test the model directly by measuring the field-angle dependence of the upturn, which the theory predicts is stronger for B perpendicular to the triplet quantization axis than for B parallel to it.
  • Inference: The arguments used to exclude impurity and vortex contributions at ambient pressure are not repeated at 2 GPa; a controlled irradiation or field-sweep study at 2 GPa would tell whether the surviving upturn has the same intrinsic origin.
  • Inference: If the interaction U is the controlling parameter, fine pressure tuning across the Lifshitz transition should show the superconducting-state upturn amplitude tracking the normal-state K(α) rather than following Tc; that correlation is not presented in the paper.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports 77Se-NMR measurements on FeSe0.82S0.18 under hydrostatic pressure up to 2.0 GPa and temperatures down to ~100 mK. The authors find that the anomalous low-temperature upturn of 1/T1T below Tc, previously attributed to Bogoliubov quasiparticle interactions, is suppressed under pressure but still apparently present at 2 GPa, while the normal-state 1/T1T becomes roughly T-independent at 2 GPa. They interpret these observations as evidence that the quasiparticle interaction U weakens but remains nonzero under pressure, and they claim consistency with a theoretical model of Bogoliubov Fermi surfaces with C2 symmetry at the Γ point. The paper also estimates a Korringa enhancement factor K(α)≈15 at 2 GPa using an assumed pressure-independent Kspin=0.03%.

Significance. If the central claim—that the SC-state upturn persists at 2 GPa—is quantitatively robust, the paper would provide one of the first pressure-dependent experimental constraints on Bogoliubov Fermi surface quasiparticle interactions, extending the ambient-pressure evidence of Ref. 15. The observation that the normal-state and SC-state temperature dependences differ across Tc at 2 GPa is an interesting and potentially falsifiable feature. However, the persistence claim currently rests on visual inspection of a small signal in Fig. 1 without error bars, and the quantitative link to U through K(α) inherits an assumed pressure-independent Kspin. The paper does not deposit data, so independent verification is not possible at present. The qualitative trend (pressure suppresses the upturn) is plausible, but the 'nonzero' conclusion requires additional statistical and theoretical support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Experimental Results, Fig. 1] The claim that the upturn of 1/T1T 'persists' at 2.0 GPa is not quantitatively supported. Fig. 1(b) shows no error bars on the 1/T1T data, and no statistical test is provided to distinguish the small deviation from a constant baseline from scatter or residual vortex-core contributions. The ambient-pressure exclusion of Volovik and impurity effects (based on the x=0.05 and x=0.10 comparison in Ref. 15) is not repeated under pressure, where the Lifshitz transition, the strongly pressure-dependent Tc (4.0→12.4 K at zero field, from Supplementary Fig. 1), and the pressure-cell environment change the background. The authors should provide point-by-point uncertainties, fit the 2 GPa SC-state data against a constant versus an upturn, and report a significance measure; if the upturn at 2 GPa is not significant, the conclusion should be revised to 'suppressed' rather than 'suppressed but nonzero'.
  2. [Spin correlation at 2.0 GPa (T>Tc), Eqs. (3)-(4)] The estimate K(α)≈15 assumes Kspin=0.03% is independent of pressure. The argument that Kspin is constant because the DOS of a two-dimensional electron system is constant is not obviously valid in the presence of the pressure-induced Lifshitz transition invoked in the preceding subsection, which changes the Fermi-surface topology. Since K(α) feeds the conclusion that U is nonzero at 2 GPa, the authors should either justify the constant-Kspin assumption under pressure more rigorously, test the sensitivity of K(α) to reasonable Kspin variations, or soften the quantitative claim to a qualitative statement that AFM fluctuations remain.
  3. [Theoretical model based on BFSs with C2 symmetry (T<Tc)] The inference from the suppression of the upturn to 'U becomes weak but nonzero' is not uniquely determined: the upturn depends both on the interaction U and on the nesting factor χ0(q) in Eq. (4), and the pressure-induced Lifshitz transition changes χ0(q) as the authors themselves discuss. The paper acknowledges that 'it is difficult to specify which contribution is larger from the experiments alone', but then attributes the pressure effect specifically to U. To make the central claim load-bearing, the authors should either demonstrate that the observed pressure dependence cannot be explained by the change in nesting alone, or present a model calculation of the expected 1/T1T under pressure with U fixed.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Data availability] The heading 'Data avaiavirity' should read 'Data availability', and the statement that data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request should be replaced or supplemented by deposition of the raw 1/T1T and Knight-shift data in a public repository to enable independent verification of the key figure.
  2. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption should specify the symbol styles for each pressure level and clearly state that plotted points are measured values; currently only dashed/solid lines are described as guides to the eye.
  3. [Equations (1)-(4)] The text uses non-standard full-width characters (e.g., '＝' in Eq. (3)) and Unicode math symbols that render inconsistently; the equations should be formatted in standard LaTeX for journal production.
  4. [Supplementary Material, Section I] The sentence 'The results measured at zero field and 6.02 T were shown in Supplementa ry Fig. 1' contains an odd spacing; also correct the inconsistent notation for the substitution level x=0.12 (written as '0.1220' in the main text discussion of Fig. 3).
  5. [Discussion of theoretical model] The experimental field orientation B//ab should be explicitly related to the spin-triplet quantization axis z used in Ref. 16, so the claim that the B⊥z calculation reproduces the data better is meaningful.
  6. [Conclusion] The phrase 'the scattering between the segments on nodal areas becomes weak but nonzero' is ambiguous about whether it refers to the interaction U, the scattering amplitude, or the resulting χ(q); clarify this in the conclusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the pressure dependence is a new external constraint and the BFS interpretation rests on an independent theoretical model, not on a fitted restatement of the target.

full rationale

The paper's central inference is that the SC-state 1/T1T upturn, previously attributed to Bogoliubov quasiparticle interactions, is suppressed but survives at 2 GPa, implying a weak but nonzero interaction U. This is an empirical claim supported by new NMR data under pressure rather than by a parameter fitted to the same target. The ambient-pressure upturn and its exclusion of Volovik/impurity effects are carried over from the authors' prior work (Ref. 15), but the ambient data are also shown in the present Fig. 1, and the pressure dependence is a fresh external constraint not used to tune the BFS model. The theoretical model of Ref. 16 is independent of the present authors and is not invoked as an unverified uniqueness theorem; the paper explicitly notes that an alternative nematic-fluctuation model (Refs. 41/42) remains an open possibility. The K(α)≃15 estimate is a reparameterization of the measured 1/T1T via the Korringa relation with an assumed Kspin, used for consistency, not as a fitted input that then predicts the same quantity. Concerns about missing error bars, visual persistence of the 2 GPa upturn, and the assumption of pressure-independent Kspin are statistical and evidential weaknesses rather than circularity. No equation in the paper reduces a claimed prediction to an input by construction, and no load-bearing step is justified solely by a self-citation chain. Therefore no specific circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims depend on one assumed experimental parameter (Kspin) and on several external theoretical assumptions (BFS model, Lifshitz transition, Korringa analysis). No new physical entities are introduced by this paper. The free parameters are not fitted to the present data in the usual sense, but the derived K(α) value inherits the uncertainty of the assumed Kspin.

free parameters (2)
  • Kspin (spin part of Knight shift) = 0.03% (assumed)
    Used in Eq. (3) to estimate K(α)≈15 at 2.0 GPa. The paper assumes Kspin is pressure-independent and attributes the entire pressure-induced decrease of K (0.01%) to Korb. This assumption is not independently verified.
  • K(α) (Korringa enhancement factor) = ≈15 at 2.0 GPa
    Computed from Eq. (3) using 1/T1T≈0.21 and the assumed Kspin=0.03%. This value is used to argue that antiferromagnetic fluctuations remain at 2.0 GPa. It depends directly on the assumed Kspin.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math 1/T1T is proportional to the q-summed imaginary spin susceptibility (Eq. 1).
    Standard NMR relaxation formula used throughout to connect the measured relaxation rate to spin fluctuations.
  • domain assumption The Korringa relation (Eq. 3) and the K(α) expression (Eq. 4) describe the relationship between 1/T1T, Kspin, and the interaction parameter α.
    Used to estimate the correlation strength at 2 GPa. Assumes a single-band-like Korringa analysis and a q-averaged RPA form that may not be valid for a multiband system with BFSs.
  • domain assumption The Bogoliubov Fermi surface model with C2 symmetry (Cao et al., Ref 16) correctly describes the low-energy excitations and spin fluctuations of FeSe0.82S0.18 in the SC state.
    The interpretation of the SC-state upturn as scattering between BFS segments relies entirely on this external theory. The model's parameters (U, gap functions) are not constrained by the present experiment.
  • domain assumption A pressure-induced Lifshitz transition near 2 GPa reconstructs the Fermi surface and changes the dominant nesting vector.
    Invoked to explain the T-independent 1/T1T in the normal state at 2 GPa. The exact crossover pressure is not measured in this work; it is taken from theory (Ref 35) and prior NMR studies at other doping levels.
  • domain assumption Kspin is pressure-independent; the observed decrease of K with pressure is entirely due to Korb.
    The paper argues that the DOS of a 2D electron system is constant, so Kspin should be constant. Under pressure, however, band structure changes could alter the effective mass and hence Kspin; this is not directly measured.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quasiparticle interaction originating from Bogoliubov Fermi Surfaces under pressure in 18%-S substituted FeSe studied via NMR." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DJRMYMZK

@misc{pith2026250720139,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quasiparticle interaction originating from Bogoliubov Fermi Surfaces under pressure in 18%-S substituted FeSe studied via NMR},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DJRMYMZK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.20139}
}
abstract

S-substituted FeSe superconductors in the tetragonal phase display several unique features among iron-based superconductors, particularly the presence of zero-energy excitations in the superconducting (SC) state. The recent concept of Bogoliubov Fermi Surfaces (BFSs), a theoretical model describing ultranodal states, has attracted considerable interest. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) studies on FeSe$_{1-x}$S$_x$ (x=0.18) have revealed an anomalous low-energy spin fluctuations deep in the SC state. The low-energy spin fluctuations are enhanced with decreasing temperature, supporting strong Bogoliubov quasiparticle interactions associated with BFSs. Here, we further investigate these correlation effects through $^{77}$Se-NMR measurements of FeSe$_{1-x}$S$_x$ (x=0.18) under pressures up to 2.0 GPa and temperatures down to ~100 mK. The results demonstrate that the anomalous enhancement is suppressed but persists under pressure, implying that quasiparticle interactions become weak by applying pressure. Furthermore, spin fluctuations in the normal state exhibit different temperature dependence from those deep in the SC state, suggesting that the nesting properties of normal electrons differ from those of Bogoliubov quasiparticles. These findings are consistent with the theoretical model of BFSs with C$_2$ symmetry and strengthen evidence for Bogoliubov quasiparticle interactions, providing insights into the unconventional pairing state of this system.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.20139 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. AC susceptibility measurements for FeSe1-xSx (x=0.18) using the tank circuit attached on the top of an NMR probe. Tcs were determined from the crosspoints of dashes lines. Left and right panels represent the measurements at zero field and 6.02 T, respectively. II. EVIDENCE OF ANTIFERROMAGNETIC ORDER UNDER PRESSURE The appearance of antiferromagnetic (AFM) ordering can be observed from anomaly in linewidth of NMR spe… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Linewidth of NMR spectra at different pressure levels [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Shibauchi, T

    T. Shibauchi, T. Hanaguri, and Y. Matsuda, Exotic superconducting states in FeSe-based materials, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 89, 102002 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    J. P. Sun, K. Matsuura, G. Z. Ye, Y. Mizukami, M. Shimozawa, K. Matsubayashi, M. Yamashita, T. Watashige, S. Kasahara, Y. Matsuda, J. - Q. Yan, B. C. Sales, Y. Uwatoko, J. - G. Cheng & T. Shibauchi , Dome-shaped magnetic order competing with high-temperature superconductivity at high pressures in FeSe, Nat. Commun. 7, 12146 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Matsuura et al., Maximizing by tuning nematicity and magnetism in FeSe1-xSx superconductors, Nat

    K. Matsuura et al., Maximizing by tuning nematicity and magnetism in FeSe1-xSx superconductors, Nat. Commun. 8, 1143 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Hosoi, K

    S. Hosoi, K. Matsuura, K. Ishida, H. Wang, Y. Mizukami, T. Watashige, S. Kasahara, Y. Matsuda, and T.Shibauchi, Nematic quantum critical point without magnetism in FeSe 1-xSx superconductors, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113, 8139 (2016)

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Hanaguri, K

    T. Hanaguri, K. Iwaya, Y. Kohsaka, T. Machida, T. Watashige, S. Kasahara, T. Shibauchi, and Y. Matsuda, Two distinct superconducting pairing states divided by the nematic end point in FeSe1-xSx, Sci. Adv. 4, eaar6419 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Mizukami, M

    Y. Mizukami, M. Haze, O. Tanaka, K. Matsuura, D. Sano, J. Böker, I. Eremin, S. Kasahara, Y. Matsuda, and T. Shibauchi, Unusual crossover from Bardeen- Cooper-Schrieffer to Bose -Einstein-condensate superconductivity in iron chalcogenides, Commun. Phys. 6, 183 (2023)

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    D. F. Agterberg, P. M. R. Brydon, and C. Timm, Bogoliubov Fermi surfaces in superconductors with broken time-reversal symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 127001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Setty, S

    C. Setty, S. Bhattacharyya, Y. Cao, A. Kreisel, and P. J. Hirschfeld, Topological ultranodal pair states in iron-based superconductors, Nat. Commun. 11, 523 (2020)

    work page 2020

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Y. Sato, S. Kasahara, T. Taniguchi, X. Xing, Y. Kasahara, Y. Tokiwa, Y. Yamakawa, H. Kontani, T. Shibauchi, and Y. Matsuda, Abrupt change of the superconducting gap structure at the nematic critical point in FeSe 1-xSx, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 115, 1227 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    P. K. Nag, K. Scott, V. S. de Carvalho, J. K. Byland, X. Yang, M. Walker, A. G. Greenberg, P. Klavins, E. Miranda, A. Gozar, V. Taufour, R. M. Fernandes, E. H. da Silva Neto, Superconductivity mediated by nematic fluctuations in tetragonal FeSe 1-xSx, 2024, https://doi.org/10....

    2024 doi arXiv

  3. [11]

    Setty, Y

    C. Setty, Y. Cao, A. Kreisel, S. Bhattacharyya, and P. J. Hirschfeld, Bogoliubov Fermi surfaces in spin- 1/2 systems: Model Hamiltonians and experimental consequences, Phys. Rev. B 102, 064504 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Matsuura et al., Two superconducting states with broken time -reversal symmetry in FeSe 1-xSx, Proc

    K. Matsuura et al., Two superconducting states with broken time -reversal symmetry in FeSe 1-xSx, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 120, e2208276120 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    Nagashima, T

    T. Nagashima, T. Hashimoto, S. Najafzadeh, S. ichiro Ouchi, T. Suzuki, A. Fukushima, S. Kasahara, K. Matsuura, M. Qiu, Y. Mizukami, K. Hashimoto, Y. Matsuda, T. Shibauchi, and K. Okazaki, Discovery of nematic Bogoliubov Fermi surface in an iron- chalcogenide superconductor, Re...

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    Y. Cao, C. Setty, L. Fanfarillo , A. Kreisel, and P. J. Hirschfeld, Microscopic origin of ultranodal superconducting states in spin-1/2 systems, Phys. Rev. B 108, 224506 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    Z. Yu, K. Nakamura, K. Inomata, X. Shen, T. Mikuri, K. Matsuura, Y. Mizukami, S.Kasahara, Y.Matsuda, T. Shibauchi, Y. Uwatoko, and N. Fujiwara, Spin fluctuations from Bogoliubov Fermi surfaces in the superconducting state of S-substituted FeSe, Commun. Phys. 6, 175 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    Y. Cao, C. Setty, A. Kreisel, L. Fanfarillo, and P. J. Hirschfeld, Spin fluctuations in the ultranodal superconducting state of Fe(Se,S). Phys. Rev. B 110, L020503 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Nagashima, K

    T. Nagashima, K. Ishihara, K. Imamura, M. Kobayashi, M. Roppongi, K. Matsuura, Y. Mizukami, R. Grasset, M. Konczykowski, K. Hashimoto, and T. Shibauchi, Lifting of gap nodes by disorder in tetragonal FeSe 1-xSx superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 156506 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    Fujiwara, T

    N. Fujiwara, T. Matsumoto, K. Koyama-Nakazawa, A. Hisada, and Y. Uwatoko, Fabrication and efficiency evaluation of a hybrid NiCrAl pressure cell up to 4 GPa, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 78, 073905 (2007)

    2007

  11. [19]

    Wiecki, K

    P. Wiecki, K. Rana, A. E. Böhmer, Y. Lee, S. L. Bud'ko, P. C. Canfield, and Y. Furukawa, Persistent correlation between super-conductivity and antiferromagnetic fluctu-ations near a nematic quantum critical point in FeSe1-xSx, Phys. Rev. B 98, 020507(R) (2018)

    2018

  12. [21]

    K. Rana, L. Xiang, P. Wiecki, R. A. Ribeiro, G. G. Lesseux, A. E. Böhmer, S. L. Bud'ko, P. C. Canfield, and Y. Furukawa, Impact of nematicity on the relationship between antiferromagnetic fluctuations and super-conductivity in FeSe0.91S0.09 under pressure, Phys. Rev. B 101, 18...

    2020

  13. [22]

    Kuwayama, K

    T. Kuwayama, K. Matsuura, J. Gouchi, Y. Yamakawa, Y. Mizukami, S. Kasahara, Y. Matsuda, T. Shibauchi, H. Kontani, Y. Uwatoko, and N. Fujiwara, Pressure -induced reconstitution of Fermi surfaces and spin fluctuations in S-substituted FeSe, Sci. Rep. 11, 17265 (2021)

    2021

  14. [23]

    K. Rana, D. V. Ambika, S. L. Bud'ko, A. E. Böhmer, P. C. Canfield, and Y. Furukawa, Interrelationships between nematicity, antiferromagnetic spin fluctuations, and superconductivity: Role of hotspots in FeSe1- xSx revealed by high pressure 77Se NMR study, Phys. Rev. B 107, 134...

    2023

  15. [24]

    A. Shi, T. Arai, S. Kitagawa, T. Yamanaka, K. Ishida, A. E. Böhmer, C. Meingast, T. Wolf, M. Hirata, and T. Sasaki, Pseudogap behavior of the nuclear spin– lattice relaxation rate in FeSe probed by 77Se-NMR, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 87, 013704 (2018)

    2018

  16. [25]

    Molatta, D

    S. Molatta, D. Opherden, J. Wosnitza, L. Opherden, Z. T. Zhang, T. Wolf, H. v. Löhneysen, R. Sarkar, P. K. Biswas, H.-J. Grafe, and H. Kühne, Superconductivity of highly spin-polarized electrons in FeSe probed by 77Se NMR, Phys. Rev. B 104, 014504 (2021)

    2021

  17. [26]

    Vinograd, S

    I. Vinograd, S. P. Edwards, Z. Wang, T. Kissikov, J. K. Byland, J. R. Badger, V. Taufour, and N. J. Curro, Inhomogeneous Knight shift in vortex cores of superconducting FeSe, Phys. Rev. B 104, 014502 (2021)

    2021

  18. [27]

    J. Li, B. L. Kang, D. Zhao, B. Lei, Y. B. Zhou, D. W. Song, S. J. Li, L. X. Zheng, L. P. Nie, T. Wu, and X. H. Chen, 77Se -NMR evidence for spin- singlet superconductivity with exotic superconducting fluctuations in FeSe, Phys. Rev. B 105, 054514 (2022)

    2022

  19. [28]

    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

  20. [29]

    Bang, Volovik effect on NMR measurements of unconventional super -conductors, Phys

    Y. Bang, Volovik effect on NMR measurements of unconventional super -conductors, Phys. Rev. B 85, 104524 (2012)

    2012

  21. [30]

    S-H. Baek, D. V. Efremov, J. M. Ok, J. S. Kim, J. van den Brink & B. Büchner, Orbital- driven nematicity in FeSe, Nat. Mater. 14, 210 (2015)

    2015

  22. [31]

    M. C. Rahn, R. A. Ewings, S. J. Sedlmaier, S. J. Clarke, and A. T. Boothroyd, Strong (π, 0) spin fluctuations in β−FeSe observed by neutron spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. B 91, 180501 (2015)

    2015

  23. [32]

    Q. Wang, Y. Shen, B. Pan, Y. Hao, M. Ma, F. Zhou, P. Steffens, K. Schmalzl, T. R. Forrest, M. Abdel - Hafiez, X. Chen, D. A. Chareev, A. N. Vasiliev, P. Bourges, Y. Sidis, H. Cao, and J. Zhao, Strong interplay between stripe spin fluctuations, nematicity and superconductivity ...

    2016

  24. [33]

    Q. Wang, Y. Shen, B. Pan, X. Zhang, K. Ikeuchi, K. Iida, A. D. Christianson, H. C. Walker, D. T. Adroja, M. Abdel-Hafiez, X. Chen, D. A. Chareev, A. N. Vasiliev, and J. Zhao, Magnetic ground state of FeSe, Nat. Comm. 7, 12182 (2016)

    2016

  25. [34]

    M. Ma, P. Bourges, Y. Sidis, J. Sun, G. Wang, K. Iida, K. Kamazawa, J. T. Park, F. Bourdarot, Z. Ren, and Y. Li , Ferromagnetic inter -layer coupling in FeSe 1-xSx superconductors revealed by inelastic neutron scattering, 2024, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2407.05548

    2024 doi arXiv

  26. [35]

    Yamakawa, and H

    Y. Yamakawa, and H. Kontani, Nematicity, magnetism, and superconductivity in FeSe under pressure: Unified explanation based on the self-consistent vertex correction theory. Phys. Rev. B 96, 144509 (2017)

    2017

  27. [36]

    Reiss, D

    P. Reiss, D. Graf, A. A. Haghighirad, W. Knafo, L. Drigo, M. Bristow, A. J. Schofield & A. I. Coldea , Quenched nematic criticality and two superconducting domes in an iron- based superconductor, Nat. Phys. 16, 89-94 (2020)

    2020

  28. [37]

    Zajicek, P

    Z. Zajicek, P. Reiss, D. Graf, J. C. A. Prentice, Y. Sadki, A. A. Haghighirad, and A. I. Coldea, Unveiling the quasiparticle behaviour in the pressure-induced high-Tc phase of an iron-chalcogenide superconductor, Npj Quantum Materials 9, 52 (2024)

    2024

  29. [38]

    Reiss, A

    P. Reiss, A. McCollam, Z. Zajicek, A. A. Haghighirad & A. I. Coldea, Collapse of metallicity and high- Tc superconductivity in the high-pressure phase of FeSe0.89S0.11, Npj Quantum Materials 9, 73 (2024)

    2024

  30. [39]

    See Supplemental Material at https://journals.aps.org/prx/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevX.10.011034/ for more information of the K-χ plot and Knight-shift

    doi

  31. [40]

    R. Zhou, D. D. Scherer, H. Mayaffre, P. Toulemonde, M. Ma, Y. Li, B. M. Andersen, and M. -H. Julien, Singular magnetic anisotropy in the nematic phase of FeSe, Npj Quantum Materials, 5, 93 (2020)

    2020

  32. [41]

    K. R. Islam and A. Chubukov, Unconventional superconductivity near a nematic instability in a multiorbital system, npj Quantum Materials 9, 28 (2024)

    2024

  33. [42]

    K. R. Islam and A. Chubukov, Unconventional superconductivity mediated by nematic fluctuations in a multiorbital system: Application to doped FeSe, Phys. Rev. B 111 094503(2025). Supplementary Material-Quasiparticle interaction originating from Bogoliubov Fermi Surfaces under ...

    2025

  34. [43]

    Kuwayama, K

    T. Kuwayama, K. Matsuura, Y. Mizukami, S. Kasahara, Y. Matsuda, T. Shibauchi, Y. Uwatoko, and N. Fujiwara, 77Se-NMR study under pressure on 12%-S doped FeSe, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88, 033703 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.