Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 104 references

Review of annealing effects and superconductivity in Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$ superconductors

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Annealing in O2 or chalcogen vapors can strip excess iron from Fe1+yTe1−xSex and turn it into a bulk superconductor.

desk verdict A genuinely useful methods review of annealing in Fe1+yTe1-xSex, but the 'totally remove excess Fe' claim overstates what surface STM and residual ICP can prove. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09455 v1 pith:JAV6O4M4 submitted 2019-08-26 cond-mat.supr-con

Yue Sun , Zhixiang Shi , Tsuyoshi Tamegai This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords excessironFe1+yTe1−xSexinterstitialFeannealingdeintercalationchalcogenidesbulksuperconductivityphasediagram
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 topical review argues that the long-running controversies over Fe1+yTe1−xSex — resistivity, Hall effect, phase diagram, gap structure — stem from one controllable defect: excess iron atoms lodged between the Te/Se layers. The paper's central claim is that annealing the crystals in oxygen, sulfur, selenium, tellurium, phosphorus, arsenic, antimony, or iodine atmospheres at 200–400°C removes essentially all of this interstitial iron, converting a filamentary or non-superconducting crystal into a bulk superconductor with Tc near 14.3 K and a nearly 100% superconducting volume. If true, the cleaned crystals reveal the intrinsic behavior of the stoichiometric compound, and the prior spread of reported properties is explained by varying residual excess Fe.

What carries the argument

The central object is the interstitial excess Fe atom (the second Fe site, written as y in Fe1+yTe1−xSex) sitting in the van der Waals gap of the Te/Se layers. The load-bearing mechanism is the 'deintercalation reaction': during annealing in a reactive atmosphere, the excess Fe migrates to the crystal surface, reacts with the atmosphere element to form a FeMx surface layer, and is thereby removed from the bulk. This reaction front propagates from the edges and surfaces toward the center, as shown by magneto-optical imaging, and the stoichiometric interior left behind shows bulk superconductivity.

What would settle it

Measure the interstitial Fe occupancy directly in a fully O2-annealed crystal using neutron or resonant X-ray diffraction, or perform STM on a cleaved surface prepared by a different method (for example, cleavage at low temperature or after ion milling) to test whether the Te/Se termination assumption holds; a detectable interstitial occupancy above about 0.1% in the annealed bulk would contradict the total-removal claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the excess iron residing in the Te/Se interstitial site acts as an electron donor, a strong local moment, a pair breaker, and a charge-carrier localizer, so its presence masks the intrinsic physics of Fe1+yTe1−xSex. By annealing in a reactive atmosphere, the excess Fe is drawn to the surface, reacts to form an FeMx layer (for example Fe2O3, FeTe2, FeSe, or FeS), and the interior is left with essentially zero interstitial Fe. The evidence is atomic-resolution STM imaging showing the disappearance of bright interstitial spots, together with the emergence of a bulk superconducting signal, a sharp specific-heat jump, and metallic resistivity. The annealed crystals show a revised doping-temperature phase diagram in which antiferromagnetism is confined to x < 0.05, the spin-glass state disappears, and bulk superconductivity appears for x ≥ 0.05 without AFM/SC coexistence.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that all excess iron is removed rests on STM images of cleaved surfaces, which assume that the cleave always exposes the Te/Se layer and that every bright spot is an interstitial iron atom, while the paper's own ICP analysis still finds non-stoichiometric iron, attributed to surface oxides.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Crystals annealed in O2, S, Se, Te, P, As, Sb, or I at 200–400°C should show bulk superconductivity with Tc ≈ 14.3 K and near-100% diamagnetic shielding, representing the intrinsic response of stoichiometric FeTe1−xSex.
  • The metallic resistivity, the sign change of the Hall coefficient at low temperature, and a large linear magnetoresistance consistent with Dirac fermions are intrinsic to the clean compound, not artifacts of the measurement.
  • The phase diagram of the stoichiometric compound has no AFM/SC coexistence and no spin-glass region; those features in as-grown crystals are induced by excess Fe.
  • Reported values of critical current density, upper critical field, and superconducting anisotropy should be re-evaluated on annealed crystals, since excess Fe suppresses Jc and alters the anisotropy.
  • Future studies of the topological surface superconductivity and Majorana bound states should use fully annealed crystals, since excess Fe obscures the surface state and contaminates tunneling spectra.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same deintercalation logic might be extendable to other chalcogenide systems with interstitial magnetic impurities, such as Fe1+yTe1−xSx, where the interstitial site appears even more robust against removal.
  • If the STM-cleavage assumption (that the cleaved surface always terminates at the Te/Se layer and each bright spot is an interstitial Fe) ever fails on a particular surface, the 'total removal' claim would need supporting bulk probes beyond magnetization, for instance neutron or resonant X-ray measurements of interstitial site occupancy.
  • The paper's mechanism implies that a tunable, time-dependent annealing protocol could produce a controlled gradient of excess Fe in a single crystal, enabling spatially resolved studies of the crossover from filamentary to bulk superconductivity.
  • The reported linear magnetoresistance and small Fermi energy on annealed crystals suggest that the stoichiometric compound sits close to a BCS-BEC crossover, and that the carrier density, not just the scattering, is altered by removing interstitial Fe.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This topical review addresses the long-standing sample dependence of Fe1+yTe1−xSex by cataloguing methods to remove interstitial excess Fe (y) and by arguing that annealing in O2, S, Se, Te, P, As, Sb, or I atmospheres at 200–400 °C removes essentially all excess Fe and induces bulk superconductivity with Tc ≈ 14.3 K. The authors present their own controlled O2 and chalcogen annealing protocols, discuss the mechanism (reaction of mobile excess Fe with the atmosphere at the surface to form FeMx layers), and review effects on magnetism, transport, Hall effect, band structure, upper critical field, anisotropy, critical current, gap structure, and the x–T phase diagram. A revised phase diagram for 'fully annealed' (y=0) crystals is proposed, with bulk superconductivity for x≥0.05 and no AFM/SC coexistence.

Significance. The review is a valuable consolidation of a large body of work, much of it from the authors' own laboratory, and it makes a practically important and falsifiable set of claims: controlled annealing reproducibly converts non-bulk-superconducting as-grown crystals into homogeneous bulk superconductors with a specific-heat jump of ΔC/γnTc ≈ 3.0 (Fig. 25), full Meissner shielding (Fig. 3), and Jc above 10^5 A/cm2. The MO imaging demonstration that the superconducting region evolves from edges to interior (Fig. 16) and the check that O2 is not incorporated into the bulk (Sec. 2.3) are particularly strong. If the quantitative 'total removal' claim is corrected to a clearly bounded statement, the review will be a useful reference for crystal preparation and for interpreting intrinsic properties.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 2.3 and Sec. 5] The central claim stated in Sec. 5 that annealing 'can totally remove the excess Fe' is stronger than the evidence presented. The direct evidence in Sec. 2.3 (Fig. 11) is STM imaging of cleaved surfaces, which certifies only the Te/Se termination layer, not the bulk interstitial occupancy; the paper's own ICP analyses of O2-annealed crystals give nonzero excess Fe, and the attribution of this residual to surface oxides is not backed by a quantitative bulk-versus-surface separation. No post-annealing interstitial-site occupancy from bulk neutron diffraction is reported, although [51] provides such data for as-grown crystals. The results firmly establish a strong reduction of excess Fe sufficient for bulk superconductivity (specific-heat jump, Fig. 25, and MO images, Fig. 16), but 'total removal' should be replaced by a bounded or qualified statement.
  2. [Sec. 4.1 and Fig. 26(d)] The revised phase diagram is presented as the 'y=0' phase diagram for 'fully-annealed (without excess Fe)' crystals. Since the bulk composition of annealed crystals is not quantitatively established (see previous comment), labeling the diagram y=0 overstates the certainty. I recommend relabeling it as the phase diagram of optimally annealed crystals and describing the inferred intrinsic properties as those of strongly deintercalated crystals, with the residual bulk y treated as an upper bound rather than zero.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 2.2] The sentence describing the alcoholic beverage effect contains the typo 'excees Fe'; please correct to 'excess Fe' throughout.
  2. [References] References [35] and [89] are cited as a private communication and a paper in preparation; these should be replaced by published versions or removed, since readers cannot verify the claims.
  3. [Sec. 3.2 and Fig. 23(c)] The B* analysis fits vF and EF as adjustable parameters; please state this explicitly and, if possible, show the fit residuals or compare with independent ARPES values, because the good agreement alone does not uniquely establish the Dirac-fermion model.
  4. [Sec. 2.4] The mechanism section would benefit from a schematic summary of the proposed edge-to-center and surface-to-interior evolution, since the MO images in Fig. 16 are the main support but are discussed only in words.
  5. [Fig. 26] Please define all symbols in the caption and indicate which quantities are taken from susceptibility, resistivity, and Hall measurements.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: annealing-removal claims rest on external STM, neutron-diffraction, and EELS evidence, and the B* Dirac inference is a model-based consistency check rather than a constructional circle.

full rationale

This manuscript is a topical review rather than a derivation, and I find no step in which a claimed result is equivalent by construction to its input. The central claim that annealing in O2, S, Se, Te, P, As, Sb, and I removes excess Fe rests on multiple independent lines of evidence: STM imaging showing disappearance of bright spots assigned to interstitial Fe, with the assignment citing external work [61] and the Te/Se-only termination citing external work [60]; neutron diffraction showing lattice-constant changes on deintercalation [51], an external structural study; EELS and EPMA identifying surface FeOx layers in external reports [62,42]; and magneto-optical imaging showing a bulk superfluid response. The review's own ICP data still find non-zero Fe in O2-annealed crystals, which the authors attribute to surface oxides; this is a quantitative-support gap for the literal phrase 'totally removed,' but it is a completeness concern, not a circular one. The B* analysis in Sec. 3.2 fits vF and EF to the measured B*(T) curve using an external Dirac-fermion formula [72,75]; this is a consistency check rather than an independent prediction, and it is not circular because the functional form is not constructed from the data being explained. Moreover, the Dirac cone is independently supported by external ARPES [15]. The paper cites the authors' own prior work extensively ([24,39,46-49,57], etc.), as expected for a review of their own annealing program, but the load-bearing facts also have external support, and no equation in the paper reduces to its inputs by definition. Therefore the derivation chain is not circular; concerns about the strength of the 'total removal' evidence belong to correctness risk rather than circularity.

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

The review's central recipe rests on empirical parameters such as annealing dose, temperature, and time, and on the interpretation of STM and ICP data. It also assumes the identity and visibility of interstitial Fe, the Te/Se-only termination of cleaved surfaces, and the oxide attribution for residual Fe. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • O2 annealing dose = 1.5% molar ratio of O2 to nominal Fe
    Optimal oxygen amount determined by tuning in Fig. 3; the central recipe depends on this empirical value.
  • Te vapor annealing dose = molar ratio Te/sample approximately 0.1
    Optimal tellurium amount from Fig. 6(b); Tc peaks at this ratio and decreases beyond it.
  • Annealing temperature = 400 C, with useful range 200 to 400 C
    Temperature chosen by hand; 500 C damages crystals and lower temperatures require longer times. This range is part of the proposed recipe.
  • Fermi velocity vF from B* fit = 1.1 x 10^5 m/s
    Extracted by fitting B*(T) to the Dirac-fermion formula in Fig. 23(c); used to support the Dirac-fermion interpretation.
  • Fermi energy EF from B* fit = 5.5 meV
    Extracted from the same B*(T) fit; compared with ARPES values in Ref. [16].
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Each bright spot observed in STM on the Te/Se termination layer is an interstitial excess Fe atom.
    Invoked in Section 2.3 and Fig. 11 to conclude that excess Fe disappears after annealing; based on prior STM work [61], but no independent atomistic verification is provided in this review.
  • domain assumption Cleaved Fe1+yTe1-xSe crystals always terminate at the Te/Se layer, so STM directly images the layer containing excess Fe.
    Stated in Section 2.3 following [60]; if other terminations occur, bright-spot counting is not a complete measure of bulk excess Fe.
  • domain assumption Residual O2, not vacuum, is responsible for the apparent vacuum-annealing effect on excess Fe.
    Section 2.2, based on controlled sealing experiments [37]; this premise supports the claim that vacuum and N2 annealing are ineffective.
  • domain assumption ICP analysis reliably quantifies excess Fe in as-grown crystals but not in annealed crystals, where non-zero Fe is attributed to surface oxides.
    Section 2.3 uses this to reconcile the non-zero ICP result with the STM total-removal claim; the attribution is not independently demonstrated.
  • standard math The extended Bean model applies to the rectangular crystals used for Jc extraction.
    Used in Section 4.3, Eq. (2); this is a standard model for magnetic hysteresis but assumes uniform current flow, which the MO images partially support.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Review of annealing effects and superconductivity in Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$ superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JAV6O4M4

@misc{pith2026190809455,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Review of annealing effects and superconductivity in Fe$_1+y$Te$_1-x$Se$_x$ superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JAV6O4M4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09455}
}
abstract

Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$ is unique in their structural simplicity, consisting of only FeTe/Se layers, which is favorable for probing the mechanism of superconductivity. Recently, a topological surface superconductivity as well as the Majorana Fermions has been observed, which makes Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$ the first high temperature topological superconductor. Since large size single crystal of Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$ can be easily grown, many researches have been performed. However, a large part of the reported results are under controversy, including the resistivity, susceptibility, Hall effect, gap structure, phase diagram, etc. These controversies are believed to come from the sample-dependent Fe nonstoichiometries, which originate from the partial occupation of the second Fe site (excess Fe) in the Te/Se layer. The excess Fe with valence near Fe$^+$ will provide electron doping into the system. Meanwhile, the excess Fe is also strongly magnetic, which will act as a paring breaker and also localize the charge carriers. Removing the excess Fe is essential to probe the intrinsic properties and mechanism of superconductivity of Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$ compounds. In this topical review, we propose the effective approaches to remove excess Fe in Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$. Furthermore, we discuss the mechanism of annealing based on the evolutions of structure, composition, and morphology with annealing. Moreover, we also review the annealing effects on the normal state and superconducting properties, including the magnetism, transport properties, band structure, $T_{\rm{c}}$, phase diagram, upper critical field, anisotropy, critical current density, gap structure, and superconducting pairing. This review presents not only the optimal way to prepare crystals without excess Fe, but also the intrinsic properties of Fe$_{1+y}$Te$_{1-x}$Se$_x$ without the influence of excess Fe.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09455 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Photograph of the as-grown FeTe0.6Se0.4 single crystal [40]. (b) Crystal structure of FeTe1−xSex [41]. The orange ball represents the excess Fe. structure, and superconducting pairing. Finally, we conclude this review with summary and perspective in section 5. 2. Experiments 2.1. Crystal growth FeTe1−xSex (x = 0 ∼ 0.4) single crystal can be successfully grown using standard melting techniques, including the self… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematic drawing of the experiment system for sealing the crystal in quartz tube with controlled amount of O2. be effective to remove excess Fe [43]. However, it was later confirmed that the vacuum and N2 annealing have no effect to the excess Fe, and the reported “vacuum”annealing effect has been proved to be from the effect of residual small amount of O2 [37], which will be discussed later. Due to the effect of O… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Temperature dependence of zero-field-cooled (ZFC) and field-cooled (FC) magnetization at 5 Oe for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystal annealed at 400◦C with increasing amount of O2 (molar ratio of the oxygen to the nominal Fe ranging from 0.1% to 1.5%) [39]. 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 # # FeSe2 SeO2 * Fe2O3 * # # # # Te2O # # # # # * * * * * * * * * * Intensity 2 # Fe1+y Te0.6Se0.4 over annealed by O2 400 oC [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (30 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: XRD pattern of the Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystal over annealed with redundant O2. Inset is the photo of the over-annealed crystals. when the mole ratio of oxygen to the nominal Fe reaches ∼ 1.5% (Tc is defined by the separating temperature for the FC and ZFC curves). …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Temperature dependence of magnetization at 5 Oe for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystal annealed in O2 atmosphere at 200◦C with increasing time [39]. (b) Evolution of Tc with time annealed in O2 at temperatures of 200◦C, 250◦C, 300◦C, and 400◦C. of O2 in all the anneali…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Temperature dependence of zero-field-cooled (ZFC) and field-cooled (FC) magnetization at 5 Oe for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals annealed at 400 ◦C with increasing amount of Te vapor (molar ratio of Te to the sample ranging from 0.01 to 80) [46]. (b) Tc as functio…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Temperature dependence of zero-field-cooled (ZFC) and field-cooled (FC) magnetization at 5 Oe for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals annealed at 400 ◦C in the atmospheres of (a) P, (b) As, (c) Sb, (d) Se, (e) S, and (f) I [46, 47, 48, 49]. The numbers in the legend are th…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a) Temperature dependence of zero-field-cooled (ZFC) and field-cooled (FC) magnetization at 5 Oe for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals immersed into alcoholic beverages (beer, red wine, Japanese sake, shochu, whisky), and 20% HCl, together with the result of O2-annealin…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a) Schematic of the electrochemical reaction method for a single crystal sample [54]. (b) Temperature dependence of the resistivity around Tc for the electrochemical reaction method treated Fe1+yTe0.8Se0.2 single crystal [54]. 2.3. Evolution of structure, composition,…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Temperature dependence of (a) the lattice constant a and (b) c for Fe1+yTe0.7Se0.3 with y= 0.009, 0.018, 0.033, and 0.048 [51]. (c) Lattice constant c for Fe1+yTe1−xSex (0 ≤ x ≤0.43) before and after removing the excess Fe [57]. (d) Comparison of the structures at 7 K…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: STM images for (a) as-grown, (b)(c) O2-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystal. The bright spots in (a) correspond to the excess Fe, which disappear in the optimally-annealed crystal [39]. microscopy (STM) measurement, which has atomic resolution. The excess Fe occupi…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Bright view of the surface colors for the crystals (a) before and after annealed for (b) 90 s(∼ 200◦C), (c) 130 s(∼ 300◦C), (d) 160 s(∼ 370◦C), (e) 200 s(∼ 400◦C). (f) is the temperature control sequence during annealing [39]. observed in crystals annealed in other at…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (a) EELS spectrum of the O2-annealed Fe1+yTe0.5Se0.5 single crystals with O-K, Te-M4,5, and Fe-L2,3 edges labeled. (b) The background subtracted experimental data of the O-K edge are shown as the open symbols. The solid curve, obtain by smoothing the experimental data…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (a) Optical microscope image of the annealed crystal. (b)(e) Elemental mapping of Fe, O, Se, and Te for the same area as (a). The left-hand side of the area is peeled to remove surface black layers, and the right-hand side is as annealed surface. On the as annealed su…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images for (a) as-grown, (b) S￾annealed, (c) Se-annealed, and (d) Te-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals. Insets are enlarged images [63]. For crystals annealed in other atmospheres, the formation of surface layers was also obse…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Meissner state magneto-optical (MO) images under 5 Oe at 10 K for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 annealed at 400◦C for (a) 1 and (b) 3 min, respectively. Magneto￾optical images in the remanent state at (c) 5 K, (d) 7 K, (e) 8 K, (f) 10 K, (g) 12 K, and (h) 14 K for the crystal annea…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Schematic in-plane spin structure of FeTe and SrFe2As2. The solid arrows and hollow arrows represent two sublattices of spins. The shaded area indicates the magnetic unit cell. Reprinted with permission from [13]. Copyright 2009 by the American Physical Society [PITH…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: (a) Temperature dependence of the volume susceptibility χdc of representative compositions (y=0.95, 1.00, and 1.10 of single-crystal FeyTe0.75Se0.25. The onset of the superconducting transition Tc onset and the midpoint corresponding to χdc=-0.5 are indicated. (b) Tem…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Magnetic susceptibilities measured at 1 T with H k c for Fe1+yTe1−xSex (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.43) (a) before and (b) after O2-annealing [57]. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 -150 -100 -50 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 H || c 5 Oe 4 M (G) Temperature (K) as-grown half-anneal…
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Temperature dependence of the resistivities scaled by the values at 300 K for the as-grown, half-annealed and fully-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals. The inset shows the temperature dependences of ZFC and FZ magnetizations at 5 Oe for the three samples [24] […
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: (a) Hall coefficients RH for the as-grown, half-annealed and fully-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals. Hall resistivity ρxy at several temperatures for the (b) as-grown, (c) half-annealed, and (d) fully-annealed crystals [24]. The ρyx for the as-grown crystal fo…
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Temperature dependence of (a) in-plane resistivity, and (b) Hall coefficients for the as-grown (left panel) and O2-annealed (right panel) Fe1+yTe1−xSex (0 ≤ x ≤ 0.43) single crystals [57]. [69], MR ≡ ∆ρ(H) ρ(0) ≈ 1 2 ΣiΣj6=iσiσj (ωciτi − ωcj τj ) 2 (Σiσi) 2 , (1) wher…
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: (a) Magnetic field dependence of magnetoresistance (MR=((ρ(H) − ρ(0))/ρ(0))) for the fully-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystal at different temperatures. Inset is the MR for the as-grown and half-annealed crystals at 16 K. (b) The field derivative of in-plane MR a…
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: (A to C) ARPES spectra for three Fe1+yTe1−xSex samples in order of decreasing y (excess Fe) from left to right. The spectra are normalized using the intensity from high-order photons, and a constant background is removed. The spectra are sharpened by adding a small pa…
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Temperature dependence of specific heat plotted as C/T vs T for the as-grown and O2-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals [39]. 4. Annealing effects on superconducting properties 4.1. Annealing effects on Tc and phase diagram The annealing effect on Tc has already …
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: The doping-temperature (x − T) phase diagrams for Fe1+yTe1−xSex single crystals reported by (a) [11], (b) [68], and the phase diagrams for our (c) as￾grown and (d) annealed single crystals [57]. (a) Reprinted with permission from [11]. Copyright 2010 by the MacMillan …
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: The resistive transitions of (a-b) as-grown and (c-d) fully-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals measured in magnetic field up to 9 T for H k c and H k ab. (e) Temperature dependence of upper critical fields for H k c and H k ab. The Hc2 is defined by the 90% of r…
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: (a-c) Temperature dependence of upper critical fields for H k c and H k ab of the as-grown, half-annealed, and the fully-annealed Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystals. (d) Anisotropy γ at the temperature rang of 0.1 ≤ T /Tc ≤ 1 for the three crystals [89]. can be calculate…
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: (a) Temperature dependence of the in-plane resistivity anisotropy measured on detwinned Fe1+xTe crystals with three different excess Fe contents. (b) In-plane resistivity anisotropy in the residual component (| ρa−ρb |) plotted against the total impurity content: x fo…
Figure 30
Figure 30. Figure 30: Changes in Tc and self-field Jc (2 K) for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 single crystal annealed at 400◦C with increasing amount of O2 [39]. 10 20 30 40 50 103 104 105 106 0 10 20 30 40 50 103 104 105 106 12 K Fe1+yTe0.8Se0.2 annealed H || c J c (A/cm2 ) H (kOe) 2 K J c (A/cm2 ) 12 …
Figure 31
Figure 31. Figure 31: Magnetic field dependences of critical current densities for H k c (up panel) and H k ab (lower panel) at different temperatures for the O2-annealed (a-b) Fe1+yTe0.9Se0.1, (c-d) Fe1+yTe0.8Se0.2, (e-f) Fe1+yTe0.7Se0.3, and (g-h) Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 [40]. 4.4. Annealing eff…
Figure 32
Figure 32. Figure 32: MO images in the remanent state after applying 800 Oe along the c￾axis in annealed (a) Fe1+yTe0.9Se0.1, (b) Fe1+yTe0.8Se0.2, (c) Fe1+yTe0.7Se0.3, and (d) Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 [40]. (e) Local magnetic induction profiles at temperatures from 5 to 14 K for Fe1+yTe0.6Se0.4 tak…
Figure 33
Figure 33. Figure 33: (a) Topographic image of (Te,Se) (T = 1.5 K, V = 1100 mV, I = 0.1 nA). Inset image is the crystal structure of Fe(Te,Se) without excess Fe. (b) Comparison between STS and ARPES data. The upper panel shows STS taken on the (Te,Se) surface (T = 1.4 K, V = -10mV, I = 0.3…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [51]

    Rodriguez E E, Stock C, Hsieh P Y, Butch N P, Paglione J and Green M A 2011 Chem. Sci. 2 1782

    work page 2011

  2. [1]

    Hsu F C, Luo J Y, Yeh K W, Chen T K, Huang T W, Wu P M, Lee Y C, Huang Y L, Chu Y Y, Yan D C and Wu M K 2008 Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 105 14262

    2008

  3. [2]

    Sales B C, Sefat A S, McGuire M A, Jin R Y, Mandrus D and Mozharivskyj Y 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 094521

    2009

  4. [3]

    Medvedev S, McQueen T M, Troyan I A, Palasyuk T, Eremets M I, Cava R J, Naghavi S, Casper F, Ksenofontov V, Wortmann G and Felser C 2009 Nat. Mater. 8 630

    2009

  5. [4]

    Burrard-Lucas M, Free D G, Sedlmaier S J, Wright J D, Cassidy S J, Hara Y, Corkett A J, Lancaster T, Baker P J, Blundell S J and Clarke S J 2013 Nat. Mater. 12 15

    2013

  6. [5]

    Lu X F, Wang N Z, Wu H, Wu Y P, Zhao D, Zeng X Z, Luo X G, Wu T, Bao W, Zhang G H, Huang F Q, Huang Q Z and Chen X H 2015 Nat. Mater. 14 325

    2015

  7. [6]

    Hayashi F, Lei H, Guo J and Hosono H 2015 Inorg. Chem. 54 3346

    2015

  8. [7]

    He S, He J, Zhang W, Zhao L, Liu D, Liu X, Mou D, Ou Y B, Wang Q Y, Li Z, Wang L, Peng Y, Liu Y, Chen C, Yu L, Liu G, Dong X, Zhang J, Chen C, Xu Z, Chen X, Ma X, Xue Q and Zhou X J 2013 Nat. Mater. 12 605

    2013

Show all 104 references
  1. [8]

    Ge J F, Liu Z L, Liu C, Gao C L, Qian D, Xue Q K, Liu Y and Jia J F 2015 Nat. Mater. 14 285

    2015

  2. [9]

    Subedi A, Zhang L, Singh D J and Du M H 2008 Phys. Rev. B 78 134514

    2008

  3. [10]

    Xia Y, Qian D, Wray L, Hsieh D, Chen G F, Luo J L, Wang N L and Hasan M Z 2009 Phys. Rev. Lett. 103 037002

    2009

  4. [11]

    Liu T J, Hu J, Qian B, Fobes D, Mao Z Q, Bao W, Reehuis M, Kimber S A J, Proke K, Matas S, Argyriou D N, Hiess A, Rotaru A, Pham H, Spinu L, Qiu Y, Thampy V, Savici A T, Rodriguez J A and Broholm C 2010 Nat. Mater. 9 718

    2010

  5. [12]

    Bao W, Qiu Y, Huang Q, Green M A, Zajdel P, Fitzsimmons M R, Zhernenkov M, Chang S, Fang M, Qian B, Vehstedt E K, Yang J, Pham H M, Spinu L and Mao Z Q 2009 Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 247001

    2009

  6. [13]

    Li S, de la Cruz C, Huang Q, Chen Y, Lynn J W, Hu J, Huang Y L, Hsu F C, Yeh K W, Wu M K and Dai P 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 054503

    2009

  7. [14]

    Lubashevsky Y, Lahoud E, Chashka K, Podolsky D and Kanigel A 2012 Nat. Phys. 8 309 Review of annealing effects and superconductivity in Fe 1+yTe1−xSex superconductors 36

    2012

  8. [15]

    Zhang P, Yaji K, Hashimoto T, Ota Y, Kondo T, Okazaki K, Wang Z, Wen J, Gu G D, Ding H and Shin S 2018 Science 360 182

    2018

  9. [16]

    Zhang P, Wang Z, Wu X, Yaji K, Ishida Y, Kohama Y, Dai G, Sun Y, Bareille C, Kuroda K, Kondo T, Okazaki K, Kindo K, Wang X, Jin C, Hu J, Thomale R, Sumida K, Wu S, Miyamoto K, Okuda T, Ding H, Gu G D, Tamegai T, Kawakami T, Sato M and Shin S 2019 Nat. Phys. 15 41

    2019

  10. [17]

    Wang D, Kong L, Fan P, Chen H, Zhu S, Liu W, Cao L, Sun Y, Du S, Schneeloch J, Zhong R, Gu G, Fu L, Ding H and Gao H J 2018 Science 362 333

    2018

  11. [18]

    Machida T, Sun Y, Pyon S, Takeda S, Kohsaka Y, Hanaguri T, Sasagawa T and Tamegai T arXiv:1812.08995

    arXiv

  12. [19]

    Si W, Han S J, Shi X, Ehrlich S N, Jaroszynski J, Goyal A and Li Q 2013 Nat. Commun. 4 1347

    2013

  13. [20]

    Taen T, Tsuchiya Y, Nakajima Y and Tamegai T 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 092502

    2009

  14. [21]

    Noji T, Suzuki T, Abe H, Adachi T, Kato M and Koike Y 2010 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 79 084711

    2010

  15. [22]

    Liu T J, Ke X, Qian B, Hu J, Fobes D, Vehstedt E K, Pham H, Yang J H, Fang M H, Spinu L, Schiffer P, Liu Y and Mao Z Q 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 174509

    2009

  16. [23]

    Liu Y, Kremer R K and Lin C T 2011 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 24 035012

    2011

  17. [24]

    Sun Y, Taen T, Yamada T, Pyon S, Nishizaki T, Shi Z and Tamegai T 2014 Phys. Rev. B 89 144512

    2014

  18. [25]

    Dong C, Wang H, Li Z, Chen J, Yuan H Q and Fang M 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84 224506

    2011

  19. [26]

    Bonura M, Giannini E, Viennois R and Senatore C 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85 134532

    2012

  20. [27]

    Das P, Thakur A D, Yadav A K, Tomy C V, Lees M R, Balakrishnan G, Ramakrishnan S and Grover A K 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84 214526

    2011

  21. [28]

    Yadav C S and Paulose P L 2009 New J. Phys. 11 103046

    2009

  22. [29]

    Noji T, Imaizumi M, Suzuki T, Adachi T, Kato M and Koike Y 2012 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 81 054708

    2012

  23. [30]

    Miao H, Richard P, Tanaka Y, Nakayama K, Qian T, Umezawa K, Sato T, Xu Y M, Shi Y B, Xu N, Wang X P, Zhang P, Yang H B, Xu Z J, Wen J S, Gu G D, Dai X, Hu J P, Takahashi T and Ding H 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85 094506

    2012

  24. [31]

    Okazaki K, Ito Y, Ota Y, Kotani Y, Shimojima T, Kiss T, Watanabe S, Chen C T, Niitaka S, Hanaguri T, Takagi H, Chainani A and Shin S 2012 Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 237011

    2012

  25. [32]

    Zeng B, Mu G, Luo H Q, Xiang T, Mazin I I, Yang H, Shan L, Ren C, Dai P C and Wen H H 2010 Nat. Commun. 1 112

    2010

  26. [34]

    Zhang L, Singh D J and Du M H 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 012506

    2009

  27. [35]

    Zhang P Private communication

  28. [36]

    Yin J X, Wu Z, Wang J H, Ye Z Y, Gong J, Hou X Y, Shan L, Li A, Liang X J, Wu X X, Li J, Ting C S, Wang Z Q, Hu J P, Hor P H, Ding H and Pan S H 2015 Nat. Phys. 11 543

    2015

  29. [37]

    Sun Y, Taen T, Tsuchiya Y, Shi Z X and Tamegai T 2013 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 26 015015

    2013

  30. [38]

    Wen J, Xu G, Gu G, Tranquada J M and Birgeneau R J 2011 Rep. Prog. Phys. 74 124503

    2011

  31. [39]

    Sun Y, Tsuchiya Y, Taen T, Yamada T, Pyon S, Sugimoto A, Ekino T, Shi Z X and Tamegai T 2014 Sci. Rep. 4 4585

    2014

  32. [40]

    Sun Y, Taen T, Yamada T, Tsuchiya Y, Pyon S and Tamegai T 2015 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 28 044002

    2015

  33. [41]

    Fujitsu S, Matsuishi S and Hosono H 2012 Int. Mater. Rev. 57 311

    2012

  34. [42]

    Komiya S, Hanawa M, Tsukada I and Maeda A 2013 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 82 064710

    2013

  35. [43]

    Hu J, Wang G C, Qian B and Mao Z Q 2012 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 25 084011

    2012

  36. [44]

    Friederichs G M, Wrsching M P B and Johrendt D 2015 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 28 095005

    2015

  37. [45]

    Li X, Sun Y, Zhang Y, Zhou W, Yuan F and Shi Z 2015 PhysicaC 517 16

    2015

  38. [46]

    Sun Y, Tsuchiya Y, Yamada T, Taen T, Pyon S, Shi Z X and Tamegai T 2013 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 82 093705 Review of annealing effects and superconductivity in Fe 1+yTe1−xSex superconductors 37

    2013

  39. [47]

    Sun Y, Tsuchiya Y, Yamada T, Taen T, Pyon S, Shi Z X and Tamegai T 2013 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 82 115002

    2013

  40. [48]

    Yamada T, Sun Y, Pyon S and Tamegai T 2016 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 85 024712

    2016

  41. [49]

    Chen J, Sun Y, Yamada T, Pyon S and Tamegai T 2016 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 85 104714

    2016

  42. [50]

    Koshika Y, Usui T, Adachi S, Watanabe T, Sakano K, Simayi S and Yoshizawa M 2013 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 82 023703

    2013

  43. [52]

    Zhou W, Sun Y, Zhang S, Zhuang J, Yuan F, Li X, Shi Z, Yamada T, Tsuchiya Y and Tamegai T 2014 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 83 064704

    2014

  44. [53]

    Deguchi K, Mizuguchi Y, Kawasaki Y, Ozaki T, Tsuda S, Yamaguchi T and Takano Y 2011 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 24 055008

    2011

  45. [54]

    Okada K, Takagi T, Kobayashi M, Ohnuma H, Noji T, Koike Y, ya Ayukawa S and Kitano H 2018 Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 57 040305

    2018

  46. [55]

    Yamashita A, Demura S, Tanaka M, Deguchi K, Yamaki T, Hara H, Suzuki K, Zhang Y, Denholme S J, Okazaki H, Fujioka M, Yamaguchi T, Takeya H and Takano Y 2014 Solid State Commun. 200 29

    2014

  47. [56]

    Yamashita A, Demura S, Tanaka M, Fujioka M, Denholme S J, Deguchi K, Yamaki T, Hara H, Suzuki K, Okazaki H, Yamaguchi T, Takeya H and Takano Y 2015 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 84 034706

    2015

  48. [57]

    Sun Y, Yamada T, Pyon S and Tamegai T 2016 Sci. Rep. 6 32290

    2016

  49. [58]

    Bendele M, Babkevich P, Katrych S, Gvasaliya S N, Pomjakushina E, Conder K, Roessli B, Boothroyd A T, Khasanov R and Keller H 2010 Phys. Rev. B 82 212504

    2010

  50. [59]

    Solid State Chem

    Viennois R, Giannini E, van der Marel D and ern R 2010 J. Solid State Chem. 183 769

    2010

  51. [60]

    Massee F, de Jong S, Huang Y, Kaas J, van Heumen E, Goedkoop J B and Golden M S 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 140507

    2009

  52. [61]

    Hanaguri T, Niitaka S, Kuroki K and Takagi H 2010 Science 328 474

    2010

  53. [62]

    Hu H, Zuo J M, Zheng M, Eckstein J N, Park W K, Greene L H, Wen J, Xu Z, Lin Z, Li Q and Gu G 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85 064504

    2012

  54. [63]

    Sun Y, Tsuchiya Y, Yamada T, Taen T, Pyon S, Shi Z and Tamegai T 2014 PhysicaC 504 12

    2014

  55. [64]

    Lin W, Ganesh P, Gianfrancesco A, Wang J, Berlijn T, Maier T A, Kalinin S V, Sales B C and Pan M 2015 Phys. Rev. B 91 060513

    2015

  56. [65]

    Sun Y, Tsuchiya Y, Pyon S, Tamegai T, Zhang C, Ozaki T and Li Q 2014Supercond. Sci. Technol. 28 015010

  57. [66]

    Ducatman S, Fernandes R M and Perkins N B 2014 Phys. Rev. B 90 165123

    2014

  58. [67]

    Thampy V, Kang J, Rodriguez-Rivera J A, Bao W, Savici A T, Hu J, Liu T J, Qian B, Fobes D, Mao Z Q, Fu C B, Chen W C, Ye Q, Erwin R W, Gentile T R, Tesanovic Z and Broholm C 2012 Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 107002

    2012

  59. [68]

    Katayama N, Ji S, Louca D, Lee S, Fujita M, J Sato T, Wen J, Xu Z, Gu G, Xu G, Lin Z, Enoki M, Chang S, Yamada K and M Tranquada J 2010 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 79 113702

    2010

  60. [69]

    Eom M J, Na S W, Hoch C, Kremer R K and Kim J S 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85 024536

    2012

  61. [70]

    Chang H H, Luo J Y, Wu C T, Hsu F C, Huang T W, Wu P M, Wu M K and Wang M J 2012 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 25 035004

    2012

  62. [71]

    Hu J, Liu T J, Qian B and Mao Z Q 2013 Phys. Rev. B 88 094505

    2013

  63. [72]

    Abrikosov A A 1998 Phys. Rev. B 58 2788–2794

    1998

  64. [73]

    Abrikosov A A 2000 Europhys. Lett. 49 789

    2000

  65. [74]

    Novoselov K S, Geim A K, Morozov S V, Jiang D, Katsnelson M I, Grigorieva I V, Dubonos S V and Firsov A A 2005 Nature 438 197

    2005

  66. [75]

    Taskin A A, Ren Z, Sasaki S, Segawa K and Ando Y 2011 Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 016801

    2011

  67. [76]

    Xu R, Husmann A, Rosenbaum T F, Saboungi M L, Enderby J E and Littlewood P B 1997 Nature 390 57 Review of annealing effects and superconductivity in Fe 1+yTe1−xSex superconductors 38

    1997

  68. [77]

    Katayama S, Kobayashi A and Suzumura Y 2007 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 75 054705

    2007

  69. [78]

    Park J, Lee G, Wolff-Fabris F, Koh Y Y, Eom M J, Kim Y K, Farhan M A, Jo Y J, Kim C, Shim J H and Kim J S 2011 Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 126402

    2011

  70. [79]

    Wang K, Graf D, Lei H, Tozer S W and Petrovic C 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84 220401

    2011

  71. [80]

    Richard P, Nakayama K, Sato T, Neupane M, Xu Y M, Bowen J H, Chen G F, Luo J L, Wang N L, Dai X, Fang Z, Ding H and Takahashi T 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 137001

    2010

  72. [81]

    Huynh K K, Tanabe Y and Tanigaki K 2011 Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 217004

    2011

  73. [82]

    Chong S V, Williams G V M, Kennedy J, Fang F, Tallon J L and Kadowaki K 2013 Europhys. Lett. 104 17002

    2013

  74. [83]

    Pallecchi I, Bernardini F, Tropeano M, Palenzona A, Martinelli A, Ferdeghini C, Vignolo M, Massidda S and Putti M 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84 134524

    2011

  75. [84]

    Bhoi D, Mandal P, Choudhury P, Pandya S and Ganesan V 2011 Appl. Phys. Lett. 98 172105

    2011

  76. [85]

    Rinott S, Chashka K B, Ribak A, Rienks E D L, Taleb-Ibrahimi A, Le Fevre P, Bertran F, Randeria M and Kanigel A 2017 Sci. Adv. 3 e1602372

    2017

  77. [86]

    152 1135

    Kawasaki Y, Deguchi K, Demura S, Watanabe T, Okazaki H, Ozaki T, Yamaguchi T, Takeya H and Takano Y 2012 Solid State Commun. 152 1135

    2012

  78. [87]

    Luetkens H, Klauss H H, Kraken M, Litterst F J, Dellmann T, Klingeler R, Hess C, Khasanov R, Amato A, Baines C, Kosmala M, Schumann O J, Braden M, Hamann-Borrero J, Leps N, Kondrat A, Behr G, Werner J and Buchner B 2009 Nat. Mater. 8 305

    2009

  79. [88]

    Zhao J, Huang Q, de la Cruz C, Li S L, Lynn J W, Chen Y, Green M A, Chen G F, Li G, Li Z, Luo J L, Wang N L and Dai P C 2008 Nat. Mater. 7 953

    2008

  80. [89]

    Pan Y Q in preparation

  81. [90]

    Liu L, Mikami T, Takahashi M, Ishida S, Kakeshita T, Okazaki K, Fujimori A and Uchida S 2015 Phys. Rev. B 91 134502

    2015

  82. [91]

    Chu J H, Analytis J G, De Greve K, McMahon P L, Islam Z, Yamamoto Y and Fisher I R 2010 Science 329 824

    2010

  83. [92]

    Ishida S, Nakajima M, Liang T, Kihou K, Lee C H, Iyo A, Eisaki H, Kakeshita T, Tomioka Y, Ito T and Uchida S 2013 Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 207001

    2013

  84. [93]

    Bean C P 1964 Rev. Mod. Phys. 36 31

    1964

  85. [94]

    Sun Y, Taen T, Tsuchiya Y, Ding Q, Pyon S, Shi Z X and Tamegai T 2013 Appl. Phys. Express 6 043101

    2013

  86. [95]

    Sun Y, Taen T, Tsuchiya Y, Pyon S, Shi Z X and Tamegai T 2013 Europhys. Lett. 103 57013

    2013

  87. [96]

    Tamegai T, Sun Y, Yamada T and Pyon S 2016 IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 26 1

    2016

  88. [97]

    Sun Y, Pyon S, Tamegai T, Kobayashi R, Watashige T, Kasahara S, Matsuda Y and Shibauchi T 2015 Phys. Rev. B 92 144509

    2015

  89. [98]

    Hu R, Bozin E S, Warren J B and Petrovic C 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 214514

    2009

  90. [99]

    Lei H and Petrovic C 2011 Phys. Rev. B 83 184504

    2011

  91. [100]

    Sun Y, Pyon S, Yang R, Qiu X, Feng J, Shi Z and Tamegai T 2019 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88 034703

    2019

  92. [101]

    Bourgeois-Hope P, Chi S, Bonn D A, Liang R, Hardy W N, Wolf T, Meingast C, Doiron-Leyraud N and Taillefer L 2016 Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 097003

    2016

  93. [102]

    Sun Y, Kittaka S, Nakamura S, Sakakibara T, Zhang P, Shin S, Irie K, Nomoto T, Machida K, Chen J and Tamegai T 2018 Phys. Rev. B 98 064505

    2018

  94. [103]

    Sun Y, Park A, Pyon S, Tamegai T and Kitamura H 2017 Phys. Rev. B 96 140505

    2017

  95. [104]

    Mizuguchi Y, Deguchi K, Tsuda S, Yamaguchi T and Takano Y 2010 Europhys. Lett. 90 57002

    2010

  96. [105]

    Yamamoto K, Yamazaki T, Yamanaka T, Ueta D, Yoshizawa H and Yaguchi H 2018 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 87 054705

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.