4.8 Article

Influence of Nanosize Hole Defects and their Geometric Arrangements on the Superfluid Density in Atomically Thin Single Crystals of Indium Superconductor

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 127, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.127003

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation through the Center for Dynamics and Control of Materials: an NSF MRSEC [DMR-1720595]
  2. NSF [DMR-1808751, DMR-1949701, DMR-2114825]
  3. Welch Foundation [F-1672]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using atomically thin superconductor platform on Si(111) with controlled nanohole defects, the study reveals the impact of defect density and geometric arrangements on superconductivity at different length scales. It was found that at certain defect density, the superfluid density can completely disappear, indicating a collapse in superconductivity.
Using Indium root 7 x root 5 on Si(111) as an atomically thin superconductor platform, and by systematically controlling the density of nanohole defects (nanometer size voids), we reveal the impacts of defect density and defect geometric arrangements on superconductivity at macroscopic and microscopic length scales. When nanohole defects are uniformly dispersed in the atomic layer, the superfluid density monotonically decreases as a function of defect density (from 0.7% to 5% of the surface area) with minor change in the transition temperature T-C, measured both microscopically and macroscopically. With a slight increase in the defect density from 5% to 6%, these point defects are organized into defect chains that enclose individual two-dimensional patches. This new geometric arrangement of defects dramatically impacts the superconductivity, leading to the total disappearance of macroscopic superfluid density and the collapse of the microscopic superconducting gap. This study sheds new light on the understanding of how local defects and their geometric arrangements impact superconductivity in the two-dimensional limit.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据