Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

High-pressure growth effects on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictide superconductors

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read High-pressure synthesis does not remove the impurity phases in fluorine-doped SmFeAsO, and the superconducting transition temperature stays at roughly 53 K across all tested conditions.

desk verdict Useful negative result: high-pressure synthesis does not clean up Sm1111, but the paper's Jc claims contradict themselves and Table 1 needs a stated method. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.20837 v1 pith:7B4YDCIM submitted 2024-12-30 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.str-elphysics.app-ph

Mohammad Azam , Manasa Manasa , Tatiana Zajarniuk , Ryszard Diduszko , Taras Palasyuk , Tomasz Cetner , Andrzej Morawski , Cezariusz Jastrzębski
show 3 more authors
Andrzej Szewczyk Micha{l} Wierzbicki Shiv J. Singh
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.str-elphysics.app-ph
keywords iron-basedsuperconductorsSmFeAsO1111oxypnictideshigh-pressuresynthesishotisostaticpressingcriticalcurrentdensitytransitiontemperatureimpurityphases
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 tests whether high-pressure, high-temperature synthesis (HP-HTS) can clean up fluorine-doped SmFeAsO (Sm1111), the iron-based superconductor family that holds the highest transition temperature near 58 K. The authors grew a series of SmFeAsO$_{0.8}$F$_{0.2}$ bulks under argon gas pressures from 0 to 1 GPa, in sealed tantalum tubes, and compared them with a conventionally synthesized parent sample. The central finding is that the impurity phases SmOF and SmAs that plague this 1111 family are robust: high pressure does not remove them, and the transition temperature stays at about 53-54 K for every sample. Only the sample grown at 0.5 GPa for 1 hour showed a modest improvement, with higher density and a critical current density roughly three times that of the parent. The paper concludes that the impurity problem in Sm1111 will need a different approach, and that HP-HTS behaves differently for this family than it does for other iron-based superconductors.

What carries the argument

The central object is the HP-HTS process itself: high argon gas pressure up to 1 GPa combined with heating at 900 $^\circ$C inside a sealed tantalum tube, applied to SmFeAsO$_{0.8}$F$_{0.2}$ in three configurations (ground-and-pelletized, direct pellet, and varied heating time). The comparison that carries the argument is the systematic side-by-side characterisation of every sample by powder X-ray diffraction for lattice parameters and impurity fractions, scanning electron microscopy for density and grain connectivity, energy-dispersive mapping for element homogeneity, Raman spectroscopy for phonon shifts, four-probe resistivity for the transition, and magnetisation loops analysed with the Bean model for critical current density. The key comparison that produces the conclusion is the table of impurity-phase fractions and densities across the G, D and T batches, which shows the impurity levels staying at roughly the same few percent under all conditions, with sample G2/T2 as the mild optimum.

What would settle it

A sample grown by HP-HTS whose quantitative X-ray fitting shows the SmOF and SmAs fractions dropping below roughly 2 percent, while the onset transition temperature rises above 55 K and the critical current density at 5 K rises by more than a factor of three over the parent, would refute the claim that the impurity phases cannot be reduced.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's claim is that, in F-doped Sm1111, the secondary phases SmOF and SmAs cannot be suppressed by high-pressure growth, so the superconducting properties remain essentially unchanged whether the sample is made by conventional solid-state reaction at ambient pressure or by HP-HTS up to 1 GPa. Across all batches, the onset transition temperature stays in the narrow range of 52-54 K and the critical current density remains on the order of $10^3$ A/cm$^2$ at 5 K. The one reproducible improvement occurs for samples that are ground, pelletized, sealed in a tantalum tube, and treated at 900 $^\circ$C, 0.5 GPa for 1 hour: such samples show lower resistivity, a slightly sharper transition, better grain connectivity, about 58 percent of theoretical density, and a critical current density of roughly $3.2 \times 10^3$ A/cm$^2$. By contrast, pressing a parent pellet directly and exposing it to high pressure tends to accumulate the impurity phases and degrades sample quality. This behaviour is presented as distinct from the 11 and 1144 families, where HP-HTS markedly enhances superconducting properties.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the impurity percentages in Table 1, estimated from X-ray diffraction by matching peak intensities without a full quantitative fitting procedure or reported error bars, are accurate enough to show that all samples are nearly identical.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • High-pressure synthesis up to 1 GPa should not be expected to purify F-doped Sm1111, so efforts to raise its critical current density must target other routes such as densification, grain texturing, or alternative dopants.
  • The optimal HP-HTS recipe for Sm1111 is 900 $^\circ$C, 1 hour, 0.5 GPa with a sealed tantalum tube, giving a density of 58 percent of theoretical and a critical current density of about $3.2 \times 10^3$ A/cm$^2$ at 5 K.
  • Grinding, pelletizing, and resealing the parent material gives better results than applying pressure directly to a pellet, which accumulates impurity phases and cracks.
  • The 1111 family behaves differently from the 11 and 1144 families, where the same HP-HTS technique improves sample quality and superconducting properties.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next step would be to test whether the impurity phases are thermodynamic equilibrium products under these conditions by attempting off-stoichiometric or excess-fluorine starting compositions.
  • The factor-of-three Jc gain in the optimal sample probably reflects improved density and grain connectivity rather than an intrinsic change in the superconducting phase, so densification alone may be a viable route for wires and tapes.
  • Applying the same 0.5 GPa, 1 hour recipe to La1111 or Nd1111 would show whether the impurity robustness is a general 1111-family property or specific to samarium.
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 paper reports a parameter study of high gas pressure and high-temperature synthesis (HP-HTS) applied to F-doped SmFeAsO (Sm1111) bulks, comparing them with a conventionally synthesized parent sample. Three batches are prepared (ground and pelletized at 0-1 GPa; direct pellet at 0, 0.5, and 1 GPa; ground and pelletized at 0.5 GPa for 0.5, 1, and 2 h). The samples are characterized by XRD, SEM/EDS, Raman spectroscopy, resistivity, and magnetization. The authors find that HP-HTS does not eliminate the SmOF/SmAs impurity phases, that the optimal growth condition is 900 C, 1 h, and 0.5 GPa, and that this optimal sample has lower resistivity, higher density, and higher Jc than the other samples. The central claim is that impurity phases in the 1111 family are robust under HP-HTS and that superconducting properties show only small variation between CSP and HP-HTS samples.

Significance. If the conclusions are properly supported, this is a useful negative result for the synthesis community: high-pressure processing up to 1 GPa does not remove impurity phases in F-doped Sm1111, in contrast to earlier HP-HTS studies on Fe(Se,Te) and CaKFe4As4. The systematic batch design, including a time series and a direct-pellet control, is a strength, as is the multi-technique characterization. The paper also provides benchmark transport and magnetic data for Sm1111 with Jc on the order of 10^3 A/cm2 at 5 K. However, the central claim is currently weakened by an internal inconsistency in the Jc reporting and by the absence of a stated quantitative method for the impurity fractions in Table 1. The study is primarily experimental and does not rely on free parameters or model-based predictions; its main value is the parametric synthesis map and the comparative data set.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; §6; Conclusions] The central claim is internally inconsistent. The Abstract states that 'all bulks synthesized by HP-HTS have almost the same Tc and Jc as the parent sample' and that HP-HTS leads to 'only a small variation in the observed superconducting properties,' but the Conclusions state that the optimal sample G2 has a 'nearly three times higher (~3.2×10^3 A/cm2) Jc value than the parent compound,' whose Jc is quoted as 'of the order of 10^3 A/cm2.' A factor of about three is not 'almost the same' and is not a small variation in Jc. Because the 'small variation' framing is part of the central claim, this contradiction must be fixed: the abstract and conclusion should be aligned, for example by describing a modest but reproducible Jc enhancement at the optimal condition and quantifying the variation with field, temperature, and numerical values.
  2. [Table 1; §1 (Structural analysis)] Table 1 reports SmOF and SmAs fractions as about 6-13% and 2-14% with one-percent-level precision, but the manuscript never states how these percentages were obtained. Section 1 mentions PDXL software and the ICDD database for phase identification, but not a quantitative method (e.g., Rietveld refinement or reference intensity ratio), nor error bars, nor how overlapping peaks with the main phase were handled. The conclusion that impurity contents are 'almost the same' across samples and that G2 has the lowest impurity content depends on these numbers. Without a stated quantification method and uncertainty, the robustness-of-impurities claim is not quantitatively supported. Please provide the refinement details and uncertainties, or soften the claim to what the XRD patterns directly show.
  3. [Figure 11; §6; Conclusions] The key Jc comparison is incompletely specified. Figure 11 shows Jc as a function of field at 5 K with a strong field dependence, but the Conclusions quote '~3.2×10^3 A/cm2' as a single number without stating the field at which it is evaluated or how the value is extracted (self-field, zero-field extrapolation, or finite field). In addition, the Bean-model calculation in Section 6 uses sample dimensions and volume, but no uncertainty propagation or multiple-sample statistics are reported. Please report the field condition and reasonable error bars for the Jc values used in the central comparison.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3 (Elemental mapping)] The text says 'growth pressure, i.e. 0.5 MPa' when discussing sample G2; this should read '0.5 GPa' to match the units used throughout the paper.
  2. [Figure 9 caption] The caption lists 'T2 for 2 hours' as the last sample in the sequence T1, T2, T3; the long-heated sample is T3, so the caption should be corrected.
  3. [§7 (Discussion)] In the heating-time paragraph, the sentence 'for a long-heated samples i.e., T2 sample, the transition temperature is reduced' is inconsistent with the sample labels: T2 is the 1-h sample, while T3 is the 2-h (long-heated) sample. The sentence should refer to T3.
  4. [§2 (Raman spectroscopy)] The text says spectra were collected 'for each content of F substitution,' but only the nominal composition x = 0.2 is studied; this should be rephrased as 'for each sample.'
  5. [Introduction] The abbreviation 'APRES' should be 'ARPES' (angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy).
  6. [Figure S9 caption] The third panel of Figure S9 is labeled '(b)' again; it should be labeled '(c)' to match Figures 11(a)-(c).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the study is an experimental parameter scan whose conclusions are read directly from measured data, with self-citations used only as context or external benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper makes no model-based predictions, fits no parameters, and derives no result from an assumed input. The central claims—that HP-HTS leaves impurity phases essentially unchanged and that 0.5 GPa, 1 h is the best of the tested conditions—are conclusions drawn from directly measured XRD, resistivity, magnetization, microscopy, and density data. The impurity-phase percentages in Table 1 are the measured input, and the statement that they are 'almost the same' across samples is an empirical summary of those numbers, not a quantity derived from them by construction. The selection of G2 as optimal is read off the measured lattice parameters, density, resistivity, and Jc, so there is no fitted-input-called-prediction pattern. Citations to prior work, including the authors' earlier HP-HTS studies on Fe(Se,Te) and CaKFe4As4, are used as motivation and comparison, not to justify the Sm1111 result, and the parent-sample benchmark is independently measured in this work. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or load-bearing self-citation is invoked. The abstract/conclusion inconsistency about Jc ('almost the same' versus 'nearly three times higher') is an internal-consistency concern about the strength of the framing, but it is not a circular derivation and therefore does not affect the circularity score.

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

The central claims rest on measurement assumptions rather than fitted parameters: the XRD impurity quantification is assumed accurate, the density measurement method is assumed valid with a theoretical density of 7.1 g/cm3, the Bean model is assumed applicable to these porous polycrystalline samples, and fluorine content is inferred from lattice parameters without direct chemical analysis. No free parameters are fitted and no new physical entities are proposed.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The relative amounts of SmOF and SmAs impurity phases extracted from XRD using PDXL software are accurate enough to compare samples.
    Table 1 lists impurity percentages, but the paper does not describe a quantitative refinement method or error analysis; the comparison of samples rests on this unstated assumption.
  • domain assumption Sample density was calculated using a theoretical density of 7.1 g/cm3 for Sm1111, and the measurement method (geometric or Archimedes) is assumed reliable.
    Table 1 lists sample density values; the experimental method for obtaining mass/volume is not stated, so the reported differences (e.g., 50% for P vs 58% for G2) depend on this unverified measurement.
  • domain assumption The Bean critical-state model applies to these polycrystalline bulk samples.
    Jc is calculated from M-H loops using the Bean formula; the formula assumes a homogeneous rectangular sample with full flux penetration, an approximation for porous polycrystalline superconductors.
  • domain assumption The actual fluorine content in the superconducting phase correlates with the lattice parameter c and unit cell volume, as inferred from XRD peak shifts.
    The paper attributes changes in c and V to changes in fluorine content without direct chemical analysis of F, so conclusions about F evaporation rely on this inference.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of High-pressure growth effects on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictide superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7B4YDCIM

@misc{pith2026241220837,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: High-pressure growth effects on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictide superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7B4YDCIM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.20837}
}
read the original abstract

High-pressure synthesis can be an effective method for improving the sample quality of materials as well as their superconducting properties. In this paper, the synthesis process of F- doped SmFeAsO has been optimized by preparing a series of bulk SmFeAsO0.8F0.2 (Sm1111) using the high gas pressure and high-temperature synthesis (HP-HTS) method, considering various growth parameters like growth pressures (0-1 GPa) and heating time (0.5-2 h). Structural, microstructural, Raman spectroscopic, transport, and magnetic measurements are employed to comprehensively analyze these bulks and derive the conclusive findings. The parent SmFeAsO0.8F0.2 prepared by the conventional synthesis process at ambient pressure (CSP) has a transition temperature (Tc) of around 53-54 K, and the critical current density (Jc) of 103 A/cm2 at 5 K with a small amount of the impurity phases (SmOF and SmAs), consistent with previous reports. Interestingly, all bulks synthesized by HP-HTS have almost the same Tc and Jc as the parent sample. The optimal growth conditions are obtained as 900C, 1 hour, and 0.5 GPa with the sealed Ta-tube, which slightly improved the sample quality and the superconducting properties compared to other bulks grown by HP-HTS. Our study confirms that the existence of the impurity phases in the 1111 family is very robust and cannot be reduced by HP-HTS, leading to only a small variation in the observed superconducting properties of Sm1111 whether prepared by CSP or HP-HTS. This is the first comprehensive investigation of the high-pressure development of Sm1111, which shows distinct behaviour from other families of iron-based superconductors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.20837 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. We subjected sample T1 to 0.5 hours, T2 t [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. The preparation conditions of three distinct batch SmFeAsO0.8F0.2 samples using the HP￾HTS technique under varying conditions are depicted. These batches are defined by considering the ground and direct pellet of the parent sample P [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Backscattered electron image (BSE; AsB) of (a–c) the parent P sample, and (d–f) G0: 0 GPa, (g–i) G1: 0.3 GPa, (j–l) G2: 0.5 GPa and (m–o) G3: 0.7 GPa (p–r) G4: 1 GPa. Bright contrast, light grey, and black contrast correspond to the phases of Sm2O3, SmFeAsO0.8F0.2, and pores. The black contrast can be SmAs/FeAs at few places [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_6.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. High-pressure growth effect on the properties of high-Tc iron-based superconductors: A short review

    cond-mat.supr-con 2025-01 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    This short review claims that 0.5 GPa growth for one hour raises Tc and Jc in FeSe0.5Te0.5 and CaKFe4As4 bulks, while SmFeAs(O,F) shows little benefit.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Iron-Based Layered Superconductor La[O 1- xFx]FeAs (x = 0.05−0.12) with Tc = 26 K,

    Y. Kamihara, T. Watanabe, M. Hirano, H. Hosono, “Iron-Based Layered Superconductor La[O 1- xFx]FeAs (x = 0.05−0.12) with Tc = 26 K,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 130 , 3296, 2008

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    Transition Temperature an d Upper Critical Field in SmFeAsO 1−x Fx Synthesized at Low Heating Temperatures,

    S. J. Singh et al., “ Transition Temperature an d Upper Critical Field in SmFeAsO 1−x Fx Synthesized at Low Heating Temperatures,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., 23 , 7300605, 2013

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    Bulk and Single Cry stal Growth Progress of Iron-Based Superconductors (FBS): 1111 and 1144,

    S. J. Singh and M. Sturza, “Bulk and Single Cry stal Growth Progress of Iron-Based Superconductors (FBS): 1111 and 1144,” Crystals , 12 , 20, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Recent advances in iron-based superconductors toward applications,

    H. Hosono, A. Yamamoto, H. Hiramatsu and Y. Ma, “Recent advances in iron-based superconductors toward applications,” Materials Today, 21 , 278-302, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Paglione and R

    J. Paglione and R. L. Greene, ‘High-temperature superconductivity in iron-based materials’, Nature Physics 6, 645 (2010). doi: 10.1038/nphys1759

    work page doi:10.1038/nphys1759 2010

  6. [6]

    J. I. Shimoyama, ‘Potentials of iron-based supe rconductors for practical future materials’, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 27 , 044002, 2014

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    P Quebe, L. J. Terbuchte, W. J. Jeitschkö, and J. Jeitschkö, ‘Quaternary rare earth transition metal arsenide oxides RT AsO ( T=Fe, Ru, Co) with ZrCuSiAs type structure’, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 302 , 70–74, 2000

    work page 2000

  8. [8]

    Hess et al

    C. Hess et al. , ‘The intrinsic electronic phase diagram of iron-o xypnictide superconductors’, EPL , 87 , 17005, 2009

    work page 2009

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    R. H. Liu et al. , ‘Anomalous transport properties and phase diagram of the FeAs-based SmFeAsO1-xFx superconductors’, Phys Rev Lett , vol. 101, no. 8, Aug. 2008, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.087001

    2008 doi

  2. [10]

    S. J. Singh, J.-I. Shimoyama, A. Yamamoto, H. Ogino, and K. Kishio, ‘Effects of phosphorous doping on the superconducting properties of SmFeAs(O,F) ’Physica C , 15 , 19-23, 2014

    2014

  3. [11]

    Azam et al

    M. Azam et al. , ‘Antimony Doping Effect on the Superconducting Properties of SmFeAs(O,F)’, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity , vol. 34 , no. 3, pp. 7300405 (2024), doi: 10.1109/TASC.2023.3343328

    2024

  4. [12]

    Role of magnetic dopants in the ph ase diagram of Sm 1111 pnictides: The case of Mn,

    G. Lamura, T. Shiroka, S. Bordignon, S. Sanna, M. Moroni, R. De Renzi, P. Carretta, P. K. Biswas, F. Caglieris, M. Putti, S. Wurmehl, S. J. S ingh, J. Shimoyama, M. N. Gastiasoro, and B. M. Andersen, “Role of magnetic dopants in the ph ase diagram of Sm 1111 pnictides: The cas...

    2016

  5. [13]

    S J Singh et al ., Weak-link behaviour observed in iron-based supe rconductors with thick perovskite-type blocking layers’ Supercond. Sci. Technol. 26 ,105020, 2013

    2013

  6. [14]

    X. C. Wang et al. , ‘Revisiting the Electron-Doped SmFeAsO: Enhanced Superconductivity up to 58.6 K by Th and F Codoping’, Chinese Physics Letters , 34 , 077401, 2017

    2017

  7. [15]

    Prakash, S

    J. Prakash, S. J. Singh, G. Thakur, S. Patnai k, and A. K. Ganguli, ‘The effect of antimony doping on the transport and magnetic properties of Ce(O/F)FeAs’, Supercond Sci Technol , 24 , 125008, 2011

    2011

  8. [16]

    S. J. Singh, J. Prakash, S. Patnaik, and A. K. Ganguli, ‘Enhancement of the superconducting transition temperature and upper critical field of LaO 0.8 F0.2 FeAs with antimony doping’, Supercond Sci Technol , 22 , 4/045017, 2009. 27

    2009

  9. [17]

    Z. A. Ren and Z. X. Zhao, ‘Research and prospe cts of iron-based superconductors’, Adv. Mater. 21 , 4584 (2009) . doi: 10.1002/adma.200901049

    2009 doi

  10. [18]

    Grain bo undary characteristics of Fe-based superconductors,

    K. Iida, J. Hänisch and A. Yamamoto, “Grain bo undary characteristics of Fe-based superconductors,” Supercond. Sci. Technol. , 33 , 043001, 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    High-temperatur e superconductivity in iron pnictides and chalcogenides,

    Q. Si, R. Yu and E. Abrahams, “High-temperatur e superconductivity in iron pnictides and chalcogenides,” Nature Reviews Materials, 1,16017, 2016

    2016

  12. [20]

    Karpinski et al

    J. Karpinski et al. , ‘Single crystals of LnFeAsO1-xFx (Ln = La, Pr, Nd , Sm, Gd) and Ba1- xRbxFe 2As 2: Growth, structure and superconducting properties’ , Physica C: Superconductivity and its Applications ,469, 370–380, 2009

    2009

  13. [21]

    N. D. Zhigadlo, S. Katrych, Z. Bukowski, S. We yeneth, R. Puzniak, and J. Karpinski, ‘Single crystals of superconducting SmFeAsO1-xFy grown at h igh pressure’, Journal of Physics Condensed Matter , 20 , 342202, 2009

    2009

  14. [22]

    Charnukha et al

    A. Charnukha et al. , ‘Interaction-induced singular Fermi surface in a high-temperature oxypnictide superconductor’, Sci Rep , 5,10392 ( 2015)

    2015

  15. [23]

    Charnukha et al

    A. Charnukha et al. , ‘High-temperature superconductivity from fine-tun ing of Fermi-surface singularities in iron oxypnictides’, Sci Rep , 5, 18273, (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    Anger et al

    F. Anger et al. , ‘On the growth and characterization of SmOFe1−xCo xAs single crystals’, J Cryst Growth , 627 , 127473. 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Hosono and S

    H. Hosono and S. Matsuishi, ‘Superconductivity induced by hydrogen anion substitution in 1111-type iron arsenides’, Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science, 17 , 49–58 (2013)

    2013

  18. [26]

    Kobayashi et al

    K. Kobayashi et al. , ‘Pressure effect on iron-based superconductor LaF eAsO1-x Hx: Peculiar response of 1111-type structure’, Sci Rep , 6, 39646, 2016

    2016

  19. [27]

    Takahashi et al

    H. Takahashi et al. , ‘Superconductivity at 52 K in hydrogen-substitute d LaFeAsO1-xHx under high pressure’, Sci Rep , 5, 07829, (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Miura et al

    M. Miura et al. , ‘Quadrupling the depairing current density in the iron-based superconductor SmFeAsO1–xHx’, Nat Mater 23 , 1370 (2024), doi: 10.1038/s41563-024-01952-7

    2024 doi

  21. [29]

    Iimura, T

    S. Iimura, T. Muramoto, S. Fujitsu, S. Matsuis hi, and H. Hosono, ‘High pressure growth and electron transport properties of superconducting Sm FeAsO 1−x Hx single crystals’, Journal of Asian Ceramic Societies , 5, 357–363, 2017

    2017

  22. [30]

    Kametani et al

    F. Kametani et al. , ‘Combined microstructural and magneto-optical stu dy of current flow in polycrystalline forms of Nd and Sm Fe-oxypnictides’ , Supercond Sci Technol , 22 , 015010 (2009)

    2009

  23. [31]

    Zhi-An et al

    R. Zhi-An et al. , ‘Superconductivity at 55 K in Iron-Based F-Doped Layered Quaternary Compound Sm[O 1−x F x ]FeAs ’, chin. phys. lett. 25 , 2215 (2008

    2008

  24. [32]

    Z. A. Ren et al. , ‘Superconductivity in the iron-based F-doped laye red quaternary compound Nd[O1 - X Fx]FeAs’, EPL , 82 57002 (2008)

    2008

  25. [33]

    M. Azam, M. Manasa, A. Morawski, T. Cetner, an d S. J. Singh, ‘High Gas Pressure and High- Temperature Synthesis (HP-HTS) Technique and Its Im pact on Iron-Based Superconductors’, Crystals (Basel) , vol. 13, no. 10, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.3390/cryst13101525. 28

    2023 doi

  26. [34]

    Manasa et al

    M. Manasa et al. , ‘Effect of impurity phase and high-pressure synthesis on the superconducting properties of CaKFe4As4’, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 190 , 111996, 2024

    2024

  27. [35]

    Manasa et al

    M. Manasa et al. , ‘Enhancement of Superconducting Properties of Polycrystalline CaKFe4As4 by High-Pressure Growth’, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity , vol. 34 , 345821, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    High-Pressure Synthesis and the Enhancement of the Superconducting Properties of FeSe 0.5 Te 0.5 ,

    M. Azam, M. Manasa, T. Zajarniuk, R. Diduszko, T. Cetner, A. Morawski, J. Wi ęckowski, A. Wi śniewski, S. J. Singh, “High-Pressure Synthesis and the Enhancement of the Superconducting Properties of FeSe 0.5 Te 0.5 ,” Materials 16 , 5358 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Copper doping effects on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictides,

    M. Azam, M. Manasa, T. Zajarniuk, T. Palasyuk, R. Diduszko, T. Cetner, A. Morawski, C. Jastrzebski, M. Wierzbicki, A. Wi śniewski, S. J. Singh, “Copper doping effects on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictides, ” J. Am. Ceram. Soc . 107 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    High Gas Pressure and High- Temperature Synthesis (HP-HTS) Technique and Its Im pact on Iron-Based Superconductors,

    M. Azam, M. Manasa, T. Cetner, A. Morawski, S. J. Singh, “High Gas Pressure and High- Temperature Synthesis (HP-HTS) Technique and Its Im pact on Iron-Based Superconductors,” Crystals 13 , 1525 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    J. B. Anooja, P. M. Aswathy, P. M. Sarun, and U. Syamaprasad, ‘A novel low temperature synthesis route for SmFeAsO 1-xFx bulk superconductor with improved transport proper ties’, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 514 , 1–5, 2012

    2012

  32. [40]

    Fujioka, S

    M. Fujioka, S. J. Denholme, M. Tanaka, H. Take ya, T. Yamaguchi, and Y. Takano, ‘The effect of exceptionally high fluorine doping on the anisot ropy of single crystalline SmFeAsO 1-xFx’, Appl Phys Lett , vol. 1 05 , 102602, 2014

    2014

  33. [41]

    Ni et al

    B. Ni et al. , ‘Critical current characteristics and history dep endence in superconducting SmFeAsOF bulk’ Journal of Physics: Conference Series 234 , 012028, 2010.[42] Y. Qi, Z. Gao, L. Wang, D. Wang, X. Zhang, and Y. Ma, ‘Superc onductivity in co-doped SmFeAsO’, Supercond Sc...

    2008

  34. [43]

    Azam et al

    M. Azam et al. , ‘Optimization of Synthesis Parameters and Superco nducting Properties of GdFeAsOF’, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity , vol. 34 , 3341858, (2024)

    2024

  35. [44]

    The optical phonon spectrum of SmFeAsO,

    C. Marini, C. Mirri, G. Profeta, S. Lupi, D. D i Castro, R. Sopracase, P. Postorino, P. Calvani, A. Perucchi, S. Massidda, G. M. Tropeano, M. Putti, A. Martinelli, A. Palenzona and P. Dore, “The optical phonon spectrum of SmFeAsO,” Europhysics Letters, 84 , 67013, (2008)

    2008

  36. [45]

    Spin-Dependent Electron−Phonon Interaction in SmFeAsO by Low-Tempe rature Raman Spectroscopy,

    L. Zhang, P. F. Guan, D. L. Feng, X. H. Chen, S. S. Xie, M. W. Chen, “Spin-Dependent Electron−Phonon Interaction in SmFeAsO by Low-Tempe rature Raman Spectroscopy,” J. Am. Chem. Soc, 132, 15223–15227, (2010)

    2010

  37. [46]

    Raman spectroscopy of RFeAsO (R_Sm, La),

    V. G. Hadjiev, M. N. Iliev, K. Sasmal, Y.-Y. S un, C. W. Chu, “Raman spectroscopy of RFeAsO (R_Sm, La),” Phy. Rev. B, 77 , 220505R, (2008)

    2008

  38. [47]

    S. J. Singh, J. I. Shimoyama, A. Yamamoto, H. Ogino, and K. Kishio, ‘Significant enhancement of the intergrain coupling in lightly F-doped SmFeA sO superconductors’, Supercond Sci Technol , 26 , 065006, (2013)

    2013

  39. [48]

    Srivastava et al

    A. Srivastava et al. , ‘Magnetotransport and thermal properties characte rization of 55 K superconductor SmFeAsO 0.85 F0.15 ’, AIP Adv , 3 , 092113. (2013)

    2013

  40. [49]

    Magnetization of high-fiel d superconductors,

    C. P. Bean et al., “Magnetization of high-fiel d superconductors,” Rev. Mod. Phys., 36 , 31, 1985 29 Table 1: List of the sample code, the amount of impurity ph ases SmOF and SmAs from the XRD measurements, the calculated sample density. Sample code SmOF (%) SmAs (%) Sample de...

    1985

Pith tools

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